Canon, Canon Canon….. Please help the video stars

Mar 14, 2012
2,272
155
which camera though did you record in 4k for . also for this camera it doesn't have 1080 24p. which is the stardard for films or filmic video. they might add it later but the omission of that is a true slap in the face. never let those in power totally dictate what you need. brands create standards. competition creates more standards. when "your guys" don't try to live up to others standards or do what the competition does( ifiti works properly), then you have to question them and let them know, we will not accept whatever you give it to us. It's Just common sense when it comes to CONSUMERS (ALL OF US) getting what we want if it is possible. I don't know about you guys but I never been apologetic for big businesses. I didn't mean to call these peopel relics, but someone has to get on their asses.
What changed since the RP announcement is that the stills crowd got another option at a lower price point, and the 4K/filmic video crowd did not. That is it. Complaining here does no good. Perhaps Canon might add features via firmware update if sales don't meet expectations, but more likely, the RP is engineered to be sold at much lower prices to be a viable stills camera with limited video functionality. I wouldn't be surprised if this model goes below 1000 USD in a couple years.
 

bokehmon22

EOS RP
Oct 31, 2016
347
186
If this product does not offer features you want/need, move on, there is a good probability that the product is not meant for you. You shouldn't worry about the wellness of the company. Let the company deal with its own market, rival companies, benefits and losses.
It seems like a lot of people already have. I'm halfway through the door waiting for EOS R Pro.
You are right that's this camera isn't for me. I don't worry about the wellness of the company either
Complaining on the forums won't change anything. The only thing Canon listened to are sale numbers.

You are right that they do have a bigger marketing data than everyone here on the forum and they know best. We shouldn't be having these discussion /s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kharan

bluediablo

EOS T7i
Oct 23, 2017
75
76
california
In this thread I have seen several comments repeating again and again that "marketing decision are the limiting factor for this and that" and most of the time "market decision limits delivering a feature that I want". So many are asking how those decisions are being made and concluding that perhaps there is some stupidity/conspiracy involved on the corporate side to arrive at those insane decisions.

Any Marketing 101 course, will tell you that market segmentation is based on 4 basic rules and corporations (including Canon) are presumably following these rules.
Rule 1: Base segmentation on data not intuition
Rule 2: Segmentation entails dividing customers into distinct groups. Meaning that the same customer do not belong to two segments.
Rule 3: Segmentation properties; accessibility and size is appropriate for having a solid customer base.
Rule 4: Use different metrics, marketing strategy (and tactics) for each segment.

But what we see in some comments here are:
1. The comments are mostly based on intuition not solid data, e.g. "I know better than Canon about including/deleting feature X" or "It's definitely intentionally marketing decision", etc. (violation of Rule 1).
2. Those who provide commenters do belong to a different segment (enthusiasts, semi-pros, etc., rather then the beginners who are the target of the RP camera) and paint the product from their own perspective. Actually we have not seen any comment from a real beginner here so far, have we? Examples of those comments are "it should have feature X because I want it" or "feature X is essential but it is left out of this product", etc. (violation of Rule 1, 2).

But from corporate perspective, it seems that they are doing their homework well, perhaps not perfect. They have more data about their customers, market size and rival products than you and me. They offer products for each segment according to their understanding of the market, and not for the needs of you and me. By doing so, they have ensured size and solidity of their customer base, with measurable targets, i.e. market share and profitability.

Conclusion: Marketing decisions are not that superficial that you may think. If this product does not offer features you want/need, move on, there is a good probability that the product is not meant for you. You shouldn't worry about the wellness of the company. Let the company deal with its own market, rival companies, benefits and losses.
Well said!
 

RayValdez360

EOS RP
Jun 6, 2012
312
97
What changed since the RP announcement is that the stills crowd got another option at a lower price point, and the 4K/filmic video crowd did not. That is it. Complaining here does no good. Perhaps Canon might add features via firmware update if sales don't meet expectations, but more likely, the RP is engineered to be sold at much lower prices to be a viable stills camera with limited video functionality. I wouldn't be surprised if this model goes below 1000 USD in a couple years.
Complaining or not buying does work. For all the bragging about a compoany being number one, if they dont make money they would do things to do get it including listening to the demands of the consumer. it seems like you guys dont care or just gave up. Rem eber when C- Log came to the MK IV. People wanted it. they had tons of fake ones and people were selling them. Canon finally did it. Even though they charged. Yet they wouldnt allow it on any other camera outside the cinema line until the EOS R
 

RayValdez360

EOS RP
Jun 6, 2012
312
97
What do marking courses say about...

1: Not having ANY segment to serve a large percentage of customers.
2: Trying to segment on features that the competition throws in.

:confused:
Segmentation by pricepoint is one thing but taking little things out to piss off people is not segmentation. I agree with 2. The top camera should have everything. Possible that works properly and the bottom should have the least. now here you got a c300 II with no 4k 60p and 10 bit and no raw, and u got a c200 with no 10 bit but 4k60 and raw. so people were confused on what to buy and most peopel cant afford to buy both hell, most people couldnt afford to buy one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Go Wild

stevelee

FT-QL
Jul 6, 2017
1,044
164
Davidson, NC
None of this discussion suggests to me that much of anybody among the target buyers will notice or care that it doesn’t have 24fps. Probably more will notice the lack of 4K in the features list, mostly some of those who have 4K TVs.

Canon likely expects to sell mostly to first-time buyers and to Rebel owners rather than those looking to upgrade their 5D IV.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nelu

Nelu

5D Mark IV, 1Dx
And the mentality they had when they enabled 1080 HD video in the 5DII that creates the HDSLR world.

FF 4K (no crop) with DPAF and C-Log would make me switch back to Canon right away from my current Fuji X-T3 excursion. Until they stop cannibalizing the video on these models, I’ll hold off buying an R mount.
Just curious, why would you switch back from Fuji?
That cannot be cheap, going back and forth from one brand to another...
 

digitalride

EOS T7i
Apr 2, 2012
50
26
Personally I shoot video maybe once per month, but I will never buy a camera that can't even shoot 1080p with my EF-S lenses. They are really narrowing down who this camera makes sense for.

People are chomping at the bit for mirrorless options cause its some shiny new thing, but instead of feeding them canon is playing an elaborate marketing game to transition from EF to RF on their terms. Until their mirrorless options are actually desirable everyone should just put an LCD viewfinder on the back of their camera and use live view when they want a mirrorless camera :)
 
Last edited:

PureClassA

Canon since age 5. The A1
Aug 15, 2014
1,611
184
Mandeville, LA
Shields-Photography.com
Just curious, why would you switch back from Fuji?
That cannot be cheap, going back and forth from one brand to another...
Fuji is another company that makes a very compelling argument for video folks. Granted the XT3 is for video, but with the crop factor of 1.75x on the EOS R series. The Fuji is really no different. Fuji also has native lenses that are relatively in expensive. The RF mount offers little as of yet (and I know Canon is pounding away on this fast as they can) in terms of "affordable" native glass.

So for video people a $1399 Fuji XT 3 is very much on par with the $1299 EOS RP but you get 4K60, 10 bit output at 422, and yes, 1080p @24. So It's a really good value for video.

ALL THAT SAID... I'm willing to bet most of those Fuji video people (like Sony shooters as well) would gladly migrate to Canon for the color science and film look that only Canon has really seemed to master. It's just that it's hard for them to give up the shooting versatility you can get in a $1399 body. No Fuji doesn't have as wide (or as good) glass lineup as Canon, but lots of video folks are still fine with adapters and manual focus. It's different world than folks like me who do mainly stills.

Canon doesn't seem interested in really clobbering that market for one reason or another. Imagine having an EOS R that did 4k60. Specs would be ON PAR with Fuji's body and that extra $900 to get that famous Canon look with access to all those sweet lenses with DPAF in servo video... That would be really enticing to a lot of them.

Again, I'm not complaining about the EOS R. It's a really nice feature set and a great looking camera. But the RP at almost the same price as the APSC Fuji XT3 (yes, cheaper) and WAY CHEAPER than the Micro 4/3 Panasonic GH5 would kill it in sales for video people if not for a few lines of code removed from the firmware...

So in otherwords, the investment in the FUJI system for what you get is comparably minimal, and switching over to Canon is not as painful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: transpo1

uri.raz

EOS 80D
Jan 5, 2016
118
58
Some of the basic features should be standard. I don't think it's asking too much for 24p in HD. A feature found in all modern camera. I don't even shoot video but I think it's a step backward for consumer.

We are looking for convergent of multiple products to simplify our life. Imagine a smart phone company saying phone is only for calling and texting.

If you want to watch YouTube, Netflix, play game, surf the net, social media get a dedicate entertainment device for each specific task.
There are many orthodox Jews who buy phones capable of making phone calls only, with no texting, no Internet, no camera, etc. Reasoning is they don't want the ability to be exposed to inappropriate content, e.g. porn and news sites catering to the general population. Companies cater to this audience with dumbed down phones and cell plans with hard zero data traffic and numbers that identify them as belonging to a kosher cell plan. Those phones and plans are, naturally, e.g. a kosher cell plan costs half the price I pay to the same cell provider.

Of course there's a counter movement, ranging from people owning a kosher phone to use in the community and a fully capable smart phone to use elsewhere, or moving to more modern neighborhoods where they would not be judged for using a smart phone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevelee

Mikehit

EOS 5D MK IV
Jul 28, 2015
3,169
375
What do marking courses say about...

1: Not having ANY segment to serve a large percentage of customers.
2: Trying to segment on features that the competition throws in.

:confused:
Nothing because those points are irrelevant to bhf373's post. If you can define 'large percentage' and convince me it matches with Canon's definition then you may have a point. What features a different manufacturer adds is relevant only in as much as it points to Canon what is possible.
When the 5DIV came out, Canon explained the 4K function along the lines that their market research told them that a vast majority of people who buy the 5DIV shot short sequences of video to supplement their stills and did not buy DSLRs with the express intention of shooting lots of video. And yet all the complaints came from people heavily invested in video who, because they posted on youtube got what could easily be defined as a voice out of all proportion to their importance to 'the market'. So in that respect it is easily foreseeable that the features the competition adds in are not particularly important to a vast majority of buyers when making their decisions.

It is 8 (?) years since the Sony and Nikon cameras overtook the Canon in technical sensor specifications. In that time a lot of photographers have died or found a different hobby and millions more have taken the hobby up or progressed from phone/compact to DSLR/MILC. If all those features you talk about were that important to the buying decision, Sony and Nikon would have hoovered up those newbies and eaten significantly into Canon's market share. And yet Nikon has fallen further behind and Sony has no greater market share than before they went mirrorless. And the fact I am talking here about old customers dying and new people coming in means that the old whine about 'it is because people are invested in Canon' just does not apply.

I would love Canon to have sensors with the capability of Sony's. But What this suggests to me is that Canon remains #1 because the technical stuff so beloved of forums and click-baiting youtubers is actually not that high on the buying decision of most customers.
 

transpo1

EOS 7D MK II
Jan 12, 2011
723
74
Just curious, why would you switch back from Fuji?
That cannot be cheap, going back and forth from one brand to another...
Yes, it's a very good question, isn't it?

Canon FF IQ will tempt me back in the long run but only if the video specs were competitive, which so far, they are not. Not to mention, I have lots of EF lenses just sitting around with my 5DIII.

The Fuji has many attributes- small, light, weather and freeze resistant, great video quality- and I can't see investing in Canon's new system until they unlock the full video potential with no crop FF 4K with DPAF autofocus, 4K 60p, and C-log.

FF 4K would be a step up from the Fuji in look and feel but no reason to invest if I'm only going to be getting 1.6x crop on the Canon as well ;)

Hope that answers your question.
 

transpo1

EOS 7D MK II
Jan 12, 2011
723
74
Fuji is another company that makes a very compelling argument for video folks. Granted the XT3 is for video, but with the crop factor of 1.75x on the EOS R series. The Fuji is really no different. Fuji also has native lenses that are relatively in expensive. The RF mount offers little as of yet (and I know Canon is pounding away on this fast as they can) in terms of "affordable" native glass.

So for video people a $1399 Fuji XT 3 is very much on par with the $1299 EOS RP but you get 4K60, 10 bit output at 422, and yes, 1080p @24. So It's a really good value for video.

ALL THAT SAID... I'm willing to bet most of those Fuji video people (like Sony shooters as well) would gladly migrate to Canon for the color science and film look that only Canon has really seemed to master. It's just that it's hard for them to give up the shooting versatility you can get in a $1399 body. No Fuji doesn't have as wide (or as good) glass lineup as Canon, but lots of video folks are still fine with adapters and manual focus. It's different world than folks like me who do mainly stills.

Canon doesn't seem interested in really clobbering that market for one reason or another. Imagine having an EOS R that did 4k60. Specs would be ON PAR with Fuji's body and that extra $900 to get that famous Canon look with access to all those sweet lenses with DPAF in servo video... That would be really enticing to a lot of them.

Again, I'm not complaining about the EOS R. It's a really nice feature set and a great looking camera. But the RP at almost the same price as the APSC Fuji XT3 (yes, cheaper) and WAY CHEAPER than the Micro 4/3 Panasonic GH5 would kill it in sales for video people if not for a few lines of code removed from the firmware...

So in otherwords, the investment in the FUJI system for what you get is comparably minimal, and switching over to Canon is not as painful.
Exactly.

And if Canon gave me a reason to switch back and invest in their new FF MILC system, I would LOVE to adapt my much beloved EF lenses and buy new RF glass.

But without FF no crop 4K, 60p, and the rest of the specs that I've repeated ad nauseam here, there simply is no reason.
 

cayenne

EOR R
Mar 28, 2012
1,856
82
Actually there is. The person who is taking the video may not have the skills to pan or crawl the camera well and the end result may look stuttering on the TV or monitor. Just check Red Pan Calculator that says the time for 24p and 30p or 60p for a given focal length for a smooth panning shot is quite different and if you don't do it right (average video shooters do not get it right) your shot will not look good. 60p and 30p are more forgiving than 24p here.

Well, then just set camera out of the box to default 30fps....if the user is that unskilled and that much of a noob, then they won't even know or figure out how to go deep enough into the menu system to change it to 24fps.

But at least have the option there for those that *do* know a bit more and have the skills....eh?

My $0.02,

cayenne
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kharan

bokehmon22

EOS RP
Oct 31, 2016
347
186
There are many orthodox Jews who buy phones capable of making phone calls only, with no texting, no Internet, no camera, etc. Reasoning is they don't want the ability to be exposed to inappropriate content, e.g. porn and news sites catering to the general population. Companies cater to this audience with dumbed down phones and cell plans with hard zero data traffic and numbers that identify them as belonging to a kosher cell plan. Those phones and plans are, naturally, e.g. a kosher cell plan costs half the price I pay to the same cell provider.

Of course there's a counter movement, ranging from people owning a kosher phone to use in the community and a fully capable smart phone to use elsewhere, or moving to more modern neighborhoods where they would not be judged for using a smart phone.
That's a very interesting info. I'm sure there are niche of electronic devices to cater to specific demands for security or cultural sensitive. I was talking about in mass context more just like Canon is making product for mass market appeal.
 

davidhfe

EOS T7i
Sep 9, 2015
52
16
None of this discussion suggests to me that much of anybody among the target buyers will notice or care that it doesn’t have 24fps. Probably more will notice the lack of 4K in the features list, mostly some of those who have 4K TVs.
They will care when they google the $1300 camera they're about to buy and see a bunch of "CANON FAIL" videos on youtube. This release has played right into the worst narratives about canon at a time they should be crushing it. DPAF is a killer features for mirrorless and instead of making the competition look like buffoons for not having it, we're arguing about a damn video frame rate. That's why this is a really questionable move on Canon's part.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kharan

cayenne

EOR R
Mar 28, 2012
1,856
82
From a purely rational standpoint, nobody wants to watch 4K, 24p, digitally stabilized footage of vlogger talking into a camera while they are walking around. But people do it. And somehow the audience manages to contain their nausea while watching it.

Canon has decided to force people into 30p. Apple also doesn't offer 24p in their camera app. I'm guessing the lack of 24p is a marketing decision rather than a tech decision. The number of people who would actually want to use this camera to shoot 24p footage is extremely low, even if it had a 24p option.
Hmm...I've edited a TON of video in 24fps on my mac, actually pretty much all of my video has been 24fps, most of it from my 5D3....

C
 

cayenne

EOR R
Mar 28, 2012
1,856
82
I can't recall ever using 24fps and can't really think of a circumstance where I would want to. OK, maybe if I were doing a Fellini parody I'd try for a cinematic look, so yes, I can conceive of my using it, but not in any likely scenarios.

I am really surprised to read that the vast majority of folks use 24 fps on YouTube. I don't think my iPhone even has that speed, though it does have 60 and 120. I'm not sure about 240. I think newer phones can do that.

Since I don't shoot 24, though my cameras support it—other than the phone, I don't have any experience mixing it in with 30 and 60 fps footage. But I know from my otherwise retiming experience in editing software that there are better ways to change frame rate than frame dropping and pull downs. Optical flow and even old-timey interpolation will usually give better results.
Pretty much everything I've ever shot for YouTube, or anything else, has been 24p. I did want to try to give a somewhat cinematic look to my videos....and, over time they slowly got better (was learning color correction/grading on Resolve over the years too)....

I don't shoot much to publish on my iPhone, but when I do, I use Filmic Pro which allows me to do a number of frame rates (24fps being my main one)...as well as using anamorphic lenses on the phone too.

So, yep, there's a LOT of us out there that use it.

HTH,

C
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kharan

Nelu

5D Mark IV, 1Dx
Fuji is another company that makes a very compelling argument for video folks. Granted the XT3 is for video, but with the crop factor of 1.75x on the EOS R series. The Fuji is really no different. Fuji also has native lenses that are relatively in expensive. The RF mount offers little as of yet (and I know Canon is pounding away on this fast as they can) in terms of "affordable" native glass.

So for video people a $1399 Fuji XT 3 is very much on par with the $1299 EOS RP but you get 4K60, 10 bit output at 422, and yes, 1080p @24. So It's a really good value for video.

ALL THAT SAID... I'm willing to bet most of those Fuji video people (like Sony shooters as well) would gladly migrate to Canon for the color science and film look that only Canon has really seemed to master. It's just that it's hard for them to give up the shooting versatility you can get in a $1399 body. No Fuji doesn't have as wide (or as good) glass lineup as Canon, but lots of video folks are still fine with adapters and manual focus. It's different world than folks like me who do mainly stills.

Canon doesn't seem interested in really clobbering that market for one reason or another. Imagine having an EOS R that did 4k60. Specs would be ON PAR with Fuji's body and that extra $900 to get that famous Canon look with access to all those sweet lenses with DPAF in servo video... That would be really enticing to a lot of them.

Again, I'm not complaining about the EOS R. It's a really nice feature set and a great looking camera. But the RP at almost the same price as the APSC Fuji XT3 (yes, cheaper) and WAY CHEAPER than the Micro 4/3 Panasonic GH5 would kill it in sales for video people if not for a few lines of code removed from the firmware...

So in otherwords, the investment in the FUJI system for what you get is comparably minimal, and switching over to Canon is not as painful.
So Fuji's got the specs but ain't got the looks. This reminds my of
Shania Twain - Man! I Feel Like A Woman

How about Sony? They might check all of your boxes?
So there's no single system that does it all...Well, certainly I would not have expected that from the EOS RP, which is an entry level camera. I don't think it's the camera for you, or for me.
Not for you because you care about video; not for me, because I'm quite happy with the 5D Mark IV and the 1DX and to just dip my toes into mirrorless, I would want something more, like an EOS R.
Thank you for taking time to provide an elaborate and thoughtful answer.
Nelu
 
  • Like
Reactions: uri.raz