More EF & PL Video Rumors Surface

[Canon Rumors Guy]

<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; margin: 70px 0 0 0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=7103"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 -50px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=7103" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=7103"></a></div>
<strong>EF & PL Mount Cameras

</strong>I’ve received more contact that EF and PL mount camcorders are coming from Canon over the next 6 months or so.  We’d see the EF mount camera most likely before the end of 2011 and the higher end PL mount version sometime before Q2 in 2012.</p>
<p>The source said the EF mount camera looks to be “affordable” and would be extremely popular, the PL mount camera would be a higher end professional solution.</p>
<p>No mention of sensor size or specs on either camera. That is usually a good sign this far ahead of any sort of announcement.</p>
<p>Take any rumor of an EF mount video camera with a large grain of salt. This is a product that does not exist yet and has a potential to be a wishlist product.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

EF lenses are not really good at video, at least those with full time manual focus. They have a slip clutch so the distance scale means nothing, and follow focus gets all messed up when the clutch slips.

EF would be a bad choice for a pro level camcorder.

 

[te4o]

Isn't this what everyone wanted - an affordable? HDV-dedicated EF cam (instead of a video 5DIII) and a stills-dedicated 5DIII with some basic video features like now ?
This will satisfy gene-c-s videography needs and will take twice more money out of the pockets of all other photogs who still will want both! This is a wise business decision from the company (looks like diversification of lines - smartphone+Pad+NetbookAir+Laptop +...) Just test your needs.
The curiosity grows and grows but I think we won't be disappointed.

 

[catz]

te4o: I want stills and motion cam, like RED, but without the budget of affording RED.
I don't want dedicated video nor still cameras, but I want one that makes both perfectly, just like RED does. Currently 5D mark II makes poor resolution video, APS-C cameras make even poorer and the 1D MKIV makes ridiculously poor resolution video, there is no detail and all detail is false detail from aliasing. I purchased the 5D for 70% video and 30% stills, and I still sort of like it and can use it, but the resolution really really sucks, yet better competitors are more expensive, such as RED is. I hope I don't need to start carrying two cameras around in the future like in the old ages when I was carrying a video camera (that sucked).

And I think your mention about HDV is just an error or lack of knowledge what it means?
I am 100% sure you are not serious that everyone wanted a HDV cam with EF. Nobody wants HDV these days! HDV is a tape format, and pretty much already dead format by now.

A perfect cam will be:
Do video with the quality of still images. Currently 5D video is significantly worse than the stills from the same camera, the difference is so huge that the video mode feels ridiculous in comparison, even when the stills are resized to 1080p frames. The only thing that would be needed would be for a DSLR shape body to produce video that looks like sequence of stills but with much higher fps. Sound recording does not matter so much, I record sound separately regardless. Some sound recording is essential to be able to record sync clap, but XLR inputs, phantom power, whatever, does not matter really. And I don't need those when I go to take still photographs.
If the video is high resolution enough, video frames can be used as stills, like with RED they can. From Canon, Nikon or Sony DSLR or SLR, this can not be done because the frames as still images are poor (I have taken some stills from video of 5D, but the aliasing on still is so much more evident than on moving image that it makes it quite unattractive source of still imagery).

And I am not a professional, sort of, I have sold and I am going to sell some of my pictures, but I don't get living from photography or cinematography at the moment and I don't see it likely thing to happen to me. For a person like me it is essential that both high quality video and stills come from the same machine. I do both and I simply couldn't carry both around, and it is hardly justified of owning both. And especially if the camcorder would be large and bulky like some old pro machines, it would be horrible downgrade to start carrying that to all the travels and adventures I document with my cam. Canon please do and deliver prosumer-RED that weights no more than 1DMKIV. First Canon revolution was to do shallow field of field cinematography with photography lenses, but now second revolution is very much needed, and that is getting the resolution up to the task. The rest is already okay.

 

[te4o]

catz, you are absolutely right - we all need both in one machine, you more than I do, my comments were a bit ironical and yes, there is a big lack of knowledge on my part too, I admit. I just used the photo from the CR-rumour file... there on the camcorder it says HDV like in old days...

 

[Axilrod]

te4o: I want stills and motion cam, like RED, but without the budget of affording RED.
I don't want dedicated video nor still cameras, but I want one that makes both perfectly, just like RED does. Currently 5D mark II makes poor resolution video, APS-C cameras make even poorer and the 1D MKIV makes ridiculously poor resolution video, there is no detail and all detail is false detail from aliasing. I purchased the 5D for 70% video and 30% stills, and I still sort of like it and can use it, but the resolution really really sucks, yet better competitors are more expensive, such as RED is. I hope I don't need to start carrying two cameras around in the future like in the old ages when I was carrying a video camera (that sucked).

And I think your mention about HDV is just an error or lack of knowledge what it means?
I am 100% sure you are not serious that everyone wanted a HDV cam with EF. Nobody wants HDV these days! HDV is a tape format, and pretty much already dead format by now.

A perfect cam will be:
Do video with the quality of still images. Currently 5D video is significantly worse than the stills from the same camera, the difference is so huge that the video mode feels ridiculous in comparison, even when the stills are resized to 1080p frames. The only thing that would be needed would be for a DSLR shape body to produce video that looks like sequence of stills but with much higher fps. Sound recording does not matter so much, I record sound separately regardless. Some sound recording is essential to be able to record sync clap, but XLR inputs, phantom power, whatever, does not matter really. And I don't need those when I go to take still photographs.
If the video is high resolution enough, video frames can be used as stills, like with RED they can. From Canon, Nikon or Sony DSLR or SLR, this can not be done because the frames as still images are poor (I have taken some stills from video of 5D, but the aliasing on still is so much more evident than on moving image that it makes it quite unattractive source of still imagery).

How can you say the video resolution from the 5D is so bad? Especially considering it wasn't designed with video in mind...... I mean they shoot House and 24 on the 5D and those are network shows, so what exactly are you doing that the 5D is so inadequate for?

I'm not saying the 5D doesn't have it's flaws, it does, but the thing is from 2008 and they are STILL trying to compare new cameras to it (FS100, F3, etc.). For $2500 bucks the thing does a hell of a lot, I don't know what kind of tests you were doing or what kind of glass you were using, but the footage should look amazing. I know that's subjective, so if not amazing it should at least look "good" by anyone's standards, but definitely not "poor"....

 

[catz]

I did not say that the 5D mark II is poor as video camera. I only said that the resolution of the 5D mark II video is poor. It is poor because for a full hd recording I would expect 1920x1080 resolution. However, it is more like upscaled 720p because of the line skipping image size reduction algorithm (that also causes aliasing and false detail).

I am using 5D mark II for video production all the time, I am just complaining that it is suboptimal for that because of the rather stupid way it shrinks the 21 megapixels into two megapixels. I would give you examples from my footage if I didn't want to keep this account anonymous here at CR. However, you can check Zacuto's episode 2. In the middle of the episode two resolution charts are shot with 5D, 7D, 1D IV video modes and cinema cameras like RED and Arri Alexa. The difference in resolution is very large and 5D mark II loses hands down to even Panasonic AF100 and interestingly enough the more expensive 1DMKIV loses hands down to 5D mark II.

It is okay for my 5D mark II to be like it is. I may end up purchasing the antimoire filter for it. But if the next model still has the barely 720p HD resolution stretched into 1080p frame (closer to SD than HD really), it will be a huge disappointment to many and everybody that hasn't already jumped to Sony and Panasonic, will finally jump. It might be that they will have better scaling algorithm/hardware for the video on the next model. However, in 7D, 550D, 600D, 60D, 1DMKIV there was no improvement at all on the image scaling, rather reduction of the image scaler quality and that's why the 5D mark II still is the best of the Canon DSLRs for shooting video.

I have also noticed that the line skipping happens before debauer. That's a horrible choice. It not only makes the aliasing to show even more rainbows, but it also makes the color resolution worse than it would otherwise be with 4:2:0 codec. It is again about resolution. Canon is a big loser in resolution. That's pretty much the only thing which is poor on it and which limits its usefulness on professional video production. The House DP said that he does not care about resolution, so for his case it is ok. But that does not suit everyone and does not suit to every purpose. Especially for chroma key work the low resolution, aliasing and then low color resolution all combined makes pulling keys from the DSLR footage PITA.

I still like the amazing cinematography people have created with the 5D mark II. Without the 5D that might not have happened and yes, it is a revolution. But the old revolution can no longer sustain itself, but a new one is needed. I hope the next one will improve video unlike all the subsequent models from Canon that have came after the 5D mark II in which the quality has got worse. 5D mark II is a great tool for a indie film maker today, but there are beginning to be better alternatives out such as Sony FS100 and Panasonic AF100. These are far from perfect, but are a beginning of the next revolution. I am looking forward to see what comes out of Canon, maybe they will create something incredible. Or maybe they just add something useless such as continuous autofocus instead of fixing the most important issue which is the lack of resolution due to poor pixel reduction algorithm. I have been waiting for this next big thing for Canon for quite long and my patience is almost running out (before I jump to Sony).

 

[Jedifarce]

How can you say the video resolution from the 5D is so bad? Especially considering it wasn't designed with video in mind...... I mean they shoot House and 24 on the 5D and those are network shows, so what exactly are you doing that the 5D is so inadequate for?

I'm not saying the 5D doesn't have it's flaws, it does, but the thing is from 2008 and they are STILL trying to compare new cameras to it (FS100, F3, etc.). For $2500 bucks the thing does a hell of a lot, I don't know what kind of tests you were doing or what kind of glass you were using, but the footage should look amazing. I know that's subjective, so if not amazing it should at least look "good" by anyone's standards, but definitely not "poor"....

I'm guessing the guy doesn't have any L glass or simply can't maximize the capabilities of his 5D, so of course it's going to look like garbage. Isn't this a case of the bad carpenter blaming his tools? Lol.

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

Red Camera is going to announce something on Nov 3rd. I think this means that the new Canon video cams will be 4k res for sure.

 

[Axilrod]

Red Camera is going to announce something on Nov 3rd. I think this means that the new Canon video cams will be 4k res for sure.

Yeah I think RED will be releasing the Scarlett (after many delays). With Canon releasing 2 cameras, I suspect the higher end one will most definitely shoot 4k (and use the new PL mount lenses Canon released) but the cost will be much higher. I'm thinking they may price them to compete directly with the Sony FS100 (+/- $5k) and the F3 (around $14k).

I'm very curious to see what the "lower end" one is like....considering that cell phones and even cheap point-and-shoots can do 1080p it seems that it would have to shoot 3k or something.

 

[niccyboy]

Red Camera is going to announce something on Nov 3rd. I think this means that the new Canon video cams will be 4k res for sure.

Yeah I think RED will be releasing the Scarlett (after many delays). With Canon releasing 2 cameras, I suspect the higher end one will most definitely shoot 4k (and use the new PL mount lenses Canon released) but the cost will be much higher. I'm thinking they may price them to compete directly with the Sony FS100 (+/- $5k) and the F3 (around $14k).

I'm very curious to see what the "lower end" one is like....considering that cell phones and even cheap point-and-shoots can do 1080p it seems that it would have to shoot 3k or something.

Questions for those DSLR video experts...

How fast would memory cards need to be to record 3k? Will CF work or does it have to be a SSD?

Is it possible to make EF lenses continuously autofocus?

Would the PL mount be negative to canon, because it will allow more third party lenses? Or does this make it more appealing for the higher end users?

Do you think that the new cameras will shoot above 60p?

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

I think the lower end camera will be 1080. Going in between doesn't make much sense. There is also a chance that they will both be 4k and one will have a better color sampling, although this seems unlikely.

The data rate will depend on the sampling, but 4k will require at least 4 times the speed of 1080p(2k) sampled at the same bit-depth and frame-rate.

5d mrkii requires aprox 50Mbs (6MB) shooting at 30fps (4:2:0). So i guess 4k cards would have to be at least 200Mbs(24MB) shooting at 30fps.

I do not think they will go above 60p, definitely not at 4k. This would be encroaching on the territory of the higher end red cameras, and require blistering data-rates (its also kind useless in most applications).

If I had to guess/hope...

The lower-end (EF) one will be 1080 (4:2:2) maxing at 30fps with a "super-35 sensor" pricing at 6K (without lenses).

The higher-end(PL) will be 4k (4:2:2) maxing at 60fps, with a larger sensor (maybe full frame) pricing at around 15,000.

 

[Axilrod]

Red Camera is going to announce something on Nov 3rd. I think this means that the new Canon video cams will be 4k res for sure.

Yeah I think RED will be releasing the Scarlett (after many delays). With Canon releasing 2 cameras, I suspect the higher end one will most definitely shoot 4k (and use the new PL mount lenses Canon released) but the cost will be much higher. I'm thinking they may price them to compete directly with the Sony FS100 (+/- $5k) and the F3 (around $14k).

I'm very curious to see what the "lower end" one is like....considering that cell phones and even cheap point-and-shoots can do 1080p it seems that it would have to shoot 3k or something.

Questions for those DSLR video experts...

How fast would memory cards need to be to record 3k? Will CF work or does it have to be a SSD?

Is it possible to make EF lenses continuously autofocus?

Would the PL mount be negative to canon, because it will allow more third party lenses? Or does this make it more appealing for the higher end users?

Do you think that the new cameras will shoot above 60p?

I'm sure in the future there will be some type of autofocus for video. As for the CF card thing, most likely it will shoot uncompressed video onto some type of external solid state drive. As for framerates, I could see it possibly shooting 120fps at a lower resolution, but that's all speculation.
What I do know is that Canon essentially started the DSLR craze and has just been sitting back watching other companies release large sensor camcorders, so I'm sure whatever they release will be as least or good (most likely better) than what is available now. We'll just have until Nov. 3rd and see

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

Has anyone used the XF300? I've heard a lot of criticism that the footage is worse than the 5d mrkii because of sensor size. This is another reason to expect bigger sensors in the upcoming cameras.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

How can you say the video resolution from the 5D is so bad? Especially considering it wasn't designed with video in mind...... I mean they shoot House and 24 on the 5D and those are network shows, so what exactly are you doing that the 5D is so inadequate for?

I'm not saying the 5D doesn't have it's flaws, it does, but the thing is from 2008 and they are STILL trying to compare new cameras to it (FS100, F3, etc.). For $2500 bucks the thing does a hell of a lot, I don't know what kind of tests you were doing or what kind of glass you were using, but the footage should look amazing. I know that's subjective, so if not amazing it should at least look "good" by anyone's standards, but definitely not "poor"....

I'm guessing the guy doesn't have any L glass or simply can't maximize the capabilities of his 5D, so of course it's going to look like garbage. Isn't this a case of the bad carpenter blaming his tools? Lol.

I'm guessing YOU don't have nay L glass, because the sharper the lens used the WORSE the 5D2 quality video. First 2MP doesn't require very sharp glass (although good contrast and color on a large scale and so on are nice of course) and more to the point here if you feed it a crazy sharp signal and shoot say fine branches and details on patterned clothing or the sort then super crips lenses mean it gets hit even worse by it's line skipping moire/aliasing/color flashing. Go out and shoot Christmas lights strung in a tree and then either shoot handheld or when there is even the slightest breeze and the lights will flash on and off if shot with a sharp lens as they fall perfectly onto capture or skipped photosites. Watch small twigs pop into and out of existence as a tree blows in the wind, etc.

 

[Jedifarce]

How fast would memory cards need to be to record 3k? Will CF work or does it have to be a SSD?

How fast? I'd be more concerned on how large the cards would have to be to hold just 5 minutes of footage at 3K. Then how much computer power you'd need to edit that footage.

Is it possible to make EF lenses continuously autofocus?

Unless you're shooting something moving fast it's really not necessary. Autofocus like on video cameras gets confused whenever something appears in the foreground and you're trying to focus on the object behind it.

Would the PL mount be negative to canon, because it will allow more third party lenses? Or does this make it more appealing for the higher end users?

I would just go with lenses like the Zeiss CP .2 primes with the EF mount. Far as I know the lenses made for the PL mount might be a problem for Full framed sensors.

 

[Jedifarce]

I'm guessing YOU don't have nay L glass, because the sharper the lens used the WORSE the 5D2 quality video.

Uhhh...look to the left of my post. Can't you see my profile picture?

As for a better glass being worse, you might want to do some work on picture style settings if video moire is a issue for you. This is part of the reason a lot of people prefer recording Flat. Or simply adjust the aperture on your lens to mask the moire. Sometimes it's just unavoidable, if it is a problem don't include it in your final editing.