Canon Announces the Cinema EOS C100 Mark II

[VanWeddings]

this is just the mark I with 60fps and auto focus update. no thanks canon. and as to why this has to do what 5d4, if canon is so conservative with its cinema line, the 5d4 has zero chance of getting 4k

 

[Axilrod]

So they pretty much decided to sell the C100 with AF standard and call it a Mark II? And they had the nerve to include the term "innovation" in the press release? What a joke.

And for everyone saying "no one needs 4K" blah blah blah has obviously never worked with 4K footage and seen the tremendous benefits it allows in post. 4K mastered in 1080p still looks better than 1080p. And the adoption rate of 4K is going to increase exponentially over the next few years. I'd suggest anyone looking to get a 4K camera wait until NAB, I'm sure 90% of the new cameras will be 4K.

 

[Etienne]

This is a small refresh, nice to have stuff if you were going to buy a new C100 anyway, and that's why the price doesn't change much.

But the big news is still the Sony PXW-FS7 ... at $2,500 dollars more it still looks like a steal compared to the C100 mkII.

I am both disappointed in the incremental upgrade (I really thought the C100 II was going to be very tempting), and happy that it looks like an easy decision: Sony wins this round.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Hmm this seems like very, very bad news for the 5D4. If even this doesn't offer 4k what hope is there for 4k 10bit 4:2:2 from 5D4 or even 4k 8bit and 1080p 10bit 4:2:2?? Or, heck, even a crisp, top quality 1080P 8bit.

Looking more and more like money will be going to Sony (and perhaps even Nikon).

My thoughts exactly. The 5D4 will almost certainly not have 4K recording. Honestly I'm a little disappointed at the Canon road map that this new announcement reveals.

And with the way the CEO was defending their DSLR sensors and calling them the best in the world I have a bad feeling it might not improve low ISO DR either. In which case.... why buy one? Just for the upped MP count?? I can't see spending money on such a thing.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Why would they provide quality video and 4k in a $3k 5DIV or sub $2k 7DII when they can get $20k for it in a C500?

Gee I don't know. Maybe because the Sony F7 does it for $8k? The Sony A7S+Shogun does it for like $4.5k? (and that includes a fancy external monitor) The GH4 does it at least semi-passably for the 4k and pretty well for their 4k downscaled to 1080P for like $2000-something. Even the D750 is said to give a better 1080P than any Canon DSLR other than 5D3 shooting RAW with ML hack and perhaps the 1DX where it is said to be like a tie? By the time the 5D4 arrives it's not impossible that an A7S2 won't do it for $2.5k all by itself.

Frankly, I don't care all that much, since I think the quality of the imagery in video is usually mostly irrelevant. The only time I'll ever make an effort to get higher video quality than, say, my SDTV, is when I visit a real IMAX theater (you know - the 15 perf 70mm horizontal version) to see a documentary where the photography is just totally outrageous, the bulbs are 15 kilowatts, and the screen occupies around 90 degrees of my field of view.

Hmm I couldn't possibly disagree more.
Why do you even shoot more than a 1MP stills cam then?

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Very mixed views on this. With only a 30fps increase, there is very little reason for anyone with the mark 1 to upgrade. Canon appears to lack innovation yet again. On the other hand, 4k is not readily available to consumers yet. Sure you can record whatever you'd like in 4k at weddings, but you have to downscale everything so you can put it on a dvd or bluray.. there is no universal disc yet that can hold up to 300gb, there are no discwriters available anytime soon if such a disc ever hits the stores that replaces bluray. The c100 is obviously aimed for sports / weddings / indy filmmakers or whatever so it is logical to have it only record 1920x1080 for the above reasons.

But canon does seem to scare the small film makers away.. thats a hefty price for only full HD, meanwhile you can get a a7s + external 4k recorder for only 4000 dollars.

Welcome to the forum. I also see no reason to record 4K today. TV sets in people's homes are not capable of displaying 4K. The Bluray disks do not have the ability to record 4K, without making dishonest compression that will steal the potential quality of 4K.

Seems to me that there is a feeling like "I have a dick that is bigger than yours". :-X

1. Plenty of consumer 4k sets are out there for sale and the prices aren't crazy like for OLED sets.
2. 4k downscaled to 1080P looks way, way, way better than what any Canon DSLR gives you out of cam and better for detail even than 5D3 + ML RAW.
3. you can use it to a get a 2x zoom or wildlife (which helps seeing how Canon keeps deciding to leave truly zoomed shooting out)
4. you can use it for super smooth panning and for some extra image stabilization
5. the roadmap for consumer displays has the TV makers planning to stop making 1080P for any but lowest of the low end sets by 2018 at the latest.
6. if you shoot 4k now you can view it in 4k when you get a 4k set, if you shoot 1080P now you can't view it in 4k when you eventually get a 4k set

I'm typing on a 4k set this moment.
And I was just looking at some 4k sample video and.... wow.

It;s nothing to heck to do with bragging rights.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Very mixed views on this. With only a 30fps increase, there is very little reason for anyone with the mark 1 to upgrade. Canon appears to lack innovation yet again. On the other hand, 4k is not readily available to consumers yet. Sure you can record whatever you'd like in 4k at weddings, but you have to downscale everything so you can put it on a dvd or bluray.. there is no universal disc yet that can hold up to 300gb, there are no discwriters available anytime soon if such a disc ever hits the stores that replaces bluray. The c100 is obviously aimed for sports / weddings / indy filmmakers or whatever so it is logical to have it only record 1920x1080 for the above reasons.

But canon does seem to scare the small film makers away.. thats a hefty price for only full HD, meanwhile you can get a a7s + external 4k recorder for only 4000 dollars.

Welcome to the forum. I also see no reason to record 4K today. TV sets in people's homes are not capable of displaying 4K. The Bluray disks do not have the ability to record 4K, without compression dishonest stealing potential quality of 4K.

Seems to me that there is a feeling like "I have a dick that is bigger than yours". :-X

True and thanks^^

The discussion between 2k and 4k is getting a little silly. It is almost like argueing how a 36 megapixel wins over a 22 megapixel camera while you only publish photos on the internet, or how there is noise on a APS-C camera when you zoom in 200%, that is like using a microscope to look at a printed a4 image on your wall!

We need a solid and widely accepted medium first with discwriters and everything before 4k becomes the new standard in even 400 dollar cameras. Consumer computers never get past the 1TB storage on average too and you also run into the problem that you need HUGE SD/CF cards to record 4k, which are very expensive and consumer unfriendly

It's a heck of a lot more efficient for storage than Magic Lantern 1080P RAW (the only current way to get really decent quality out of a Canon DSLR for video).
You can get a 4TB drive for $129 at any Best Buy. What is this consumers are locked into 1TB total storage?

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Re: Canonitis strikes Cinema EOS

This should surprise nobody. Canon are doing with their Cx00 line what they do with DSLRs: release small incremental updates with each newer version to maximum the extraction of money from their customers.

The only thing missing from the announcement was price.

Video is a much fiercer market, far fewer fanboys and people don't get locked in as much at the upper mid and higher end so that seems a particularly dangerous game to play for video.

 

[peederj]

Let's not forget the 1DC, a Canon DSLR with full-frame 4K video (and the first DSLR with either).

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Let's not forget the 1DC, a Canon DSLR with full-frame 4K video (and the first DSLR with either).

Which is crippled and poor compared to the FS7 and lists for thousands more....

 

[peederj]

But the FS7 doesn't include a free 1DX in the tin.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Why people are comparing a theoretical 5dIV (which has literally none of the same specs as this camera) is beyond me.

Because if you know how Canon works, this camera even though maybe it should have nothing to do with the 5D4, will. They simple refuse to give the regular DSLR line anything to touch the Cxx line at all. So if the Cxx line low end doesn't get 4k what does that bode for 4k or at even top quality Cxx-quality 1080P for the 5D4? Or even something as basic as focusing aids and zebras? Or 10bits? Or 4:2:2?

 

[RobD]

Canon is not so concerned about their camera division these days, as they are expanding into the automotive and firearms industries. Revolutionary patents revealed.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

But the FS7 doesn't include a free 1DX in the tin.

True, but the pure video guys don't care at all.

And the stills and video guys could get go with with say 5D3 for stills plus A7S+Shogun and that is still less money in total than the 1DC. Or a D750+A7S+Shogun and still less money than 1DC. Or 5D3+A7R+A7S+Shogun for still less money than a 1DC. etc. A lot of stills guys prefer having a smaller stills option body than a 1DX anyway. Some wouldn't mind more low ISO DR. Or reach, maybe some combine with a 7D2. And by the time the 5D4 drops who is to say an A7S2 with internal recording won't be out for $2.5k too.

 

[Ebrahim Saadawi]

If you use the C300 and C100 daily you will know how significantly better the C300 feels, and this upgrade makes the C100 actually nicer than the C300. The tiltable hq EVF is alone worthy of upgrade, the screen is also a great addition, slowmotion also is very good, these were the only complaints people had with the C100 and it fixed those. The dual pixel AF in the entire frame can revolutionize event/sports/documentary shooting. They also DO claim higher image quality and better high ISO performance.let's wait and see what it does in real life tests, but this seems like the most "complete" video camera for 5$k now. If you need 4K, this camera is not 4K, look at 4K cameras, there are many.

The Canon C line while disappoints web-readers who don't actually use the cameras, prove to be the best in class when actually used. The C300 didn't become the de facto standard for news and broadcast for it's spec sheet, remember how the scarlet was announced on the same day with an enormous spec sheet, look how many use the scarlet compared to the c300 now. Let's wait until we see the images and real-life tests.

 

[peederj]

If the 5D4 is the high-megapixel camera, the video on it is going to be rather poor indeed, as the readout speed limits will mean either line-skipping, severe cropping, or miserable rolling shutter. I don't think the 5D4 will be the high-megapixel camera I think that will be the 1DXs or something like that. The 5D4 will be more or less the 5D3 we have now, but enhanced with the new toys like GPS, touch-to-focus, DPAF, 1080p60, and maybe a storage format bump to CFast.

 

[moreorless]

Don't underestimate 4k. While I don't expect to be mastering out to 4k for a year or two, you will very soon be needing it. Any new camera without it for video will have a shorter shelf life and lower resale value.
Plus, shooting 4k and mastering to 1080p has revolutionized how I film weddings. We can't always set up our shots beforehand and being able to crop/zoom, recompose,stabilize, and even pan in post is amazing!

For this reason I would imagine 4K might make sense on a 5D4, wedding photographers who also film and amature filmers of family events are I would guess more likely to want 4K than lower end TV/film productions the C100 seems to be aimed at. Canon will I would guess look to sell the C300/C500 or just the latter as the professional video camera with 4K video for awhile then filter it down to the cheaper C100 afterwards.

My guess is still that the high megapixel camera won't be the standard 5D but rather a new lineup.

 

[WesEvans]

I'm guessing Canon put a typo in their press release as it says 1080p60 instead of 60i. 60p would be preferable and I'm confused how 60i is any different from the first iteration (in terms of slow motion capability), they may as well highlight that it also runs on batteries. Hopefully it's a press release error though, I'd be rather happy with 60p.

That said, I'll likely buy it when it hits in December as I'm in the market for it. Sony's a7s' poor shutter performance easily steers me away from that as I do love handheld and a lot of motion. I'll still check out the FS7 to do full diligence, but suspect I'll stick with Canon, great shutter, no extra gear to work with my lenses, fantastic image, great battery performance, built-in XLRs...it's an ideal run 'n gun camera in my mind, and the FS7 definitely seems primed to battle it.

 

[Ebrahim Saadawi]

WesEvans it's 60p. 60 progressive frames at 1080p for 2x slowmotion when downconverted to 30p. 60i is interlaced so every frame is. two fields therefore 60i = 30p, that was the original C100.

 

[WesEvans]

WesEvans it's 60p. 60 progressive frames at 1080p for 2x slowmotion when downconverted to 30p. 60i is interlaced so every frame is. two fields therefore 60i = 30p, that was the original C100.

I understand the difference between progressive and interlaced, but the specs seemed to indicate "1080 60/50i" on the snapshot of the specs here and on B&H, which I took to mean 60i & 50i, but you're sure they're saying 60p?