Canon Announces the Cinema EOS C100 Mark II

Tugela

EOS R
Feb 12, 2014
873
23
Ebrahim Saadawi said:
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.

It became the standard because at the time it delivered the best image for the price, but that is no longer true. People still use them because they have them and/or are locked into the brand for one reason or another. More advanced cameras from other manufacturers will take longer to achieve overall market penetration because people don't replace their cameras every year, but eventually they will get that market share if Canon continues to be way behind the ball.

Now days there are better options at lower price points. If Canon think that they will continue to dominate the market simply because the dominated the market in the past, they are in for a rude awakening.
 

SPG

EOS M50
Jun 17, 2013
25
0
liangfire said:
And then, Axiom released the Beta camera and Canon, along with Nikon and RED just lost the majority of their clientele. Shattered even further with the release of the Axiom Gamma soon afterwards.

Canon, the only reason why you're even around is because of hype and Magic Lantern. And then Magic Lnatern's developers went on AXIOM and gave canon the Deuces.
Ha! Thanks, I needed a good laugh this morning.
Obviously you've never worked with any of these cameras in a professional environment.
Canon DSLRs were used in real productions because they had something to offer...super 35mm image...and so we were willing to put up with the other shortcomings.
RED offers a raw digital image in 5k so we overlook it's occasional bugginess.
Nikon offers, uh, offers...yeah we don't really use them.
Canon C series offers a beautiful HD image for a fraction of the cost of an Alexa so it gets used for everything that can't afford an Alexa and doesn't have the post time available for a RED.
Black Magic sold a bunch of cameras to enthusiasts and internet fans, but you don't see it much in real production above film students first indie film. It's just too buggy and too limited to work well in a critical environment.
Where is the Axiom going to fit in here? A beta product without a major company resources to back it up? Black Magic and AJA are much bigger companies and neither can keep their delivery dates or support needed to make their cameras work in these kinds of environments. How is Axiom going to do it? Open source? Riiiiight. It's going to be a niche camera like the Digital Bolex, and there's nothing wrong with that, just don't imagine that something that looks nice on paper is going to take over the world. Reputation and reliability often count more than specs.
 

Tugela

EOS R
Feb 12, 2014
873
23
MGE said:
Lee Jay said:
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?

That depends how many C500s Canon sells. I've done some professional video work but am not plugged in enough to know how many C500 units Canon moves relative to the competition.

My suspicion is that Canon would earn greater profits if it were to provide 4K at more aggressive price points. An expensive product such as the C500 isn't necessarily more profitable than a cheaper product. It might be more profitable per unit but C500 sales volume will never come anywhere near Canon's prosumer DSLR sales volume. For the strategy that your question suggests to make sense, Canon's C500 margins would have to be insane.

It all depends on margins and sales volumes. The potential markets for the next 5D and the new C100 are both much, much bigger than the potential market for the C500. Seems to me that Canon could maximize these potentially large prosumer markets by catering to demand for 4K content under $10,000 (let alone under $5000, which is where I really think Canon should be looking within the next 12 months). Granted, I think Canon might be most concerned with establishing its brand in Hollywood-- a short-term concern that momentarily displaces margins and volume as the reigning considerations. Plus, from what I hear and read, the C500 is a role player in Hollywood, so Canon's decision to ignore maximized sales volume might have been a miscalculation in the first place.

I know not everyone in this forum shares in the demand for 4K. Some are happy with HD, some consider themselves photographers with littler interest in video. That's fine. But consider this: More and more content is being consumed through screens that aren't TVs, and more and more of these screens come with greater-than-HD pixel density. It doesn't matter that most people don't have 4K TVs, at least not to the extent that some people pretend. You think there's some overlap between the sort of person who might spend $3500 on a well-configured version of Apple's new 5K iMac and the sort of person who might spend $3-5K on a DSLR or C-series camera with 4K? You bet there is. And the 5K iMac is only the most extreme and recent example. Very, very soon, Intel, Microsoft, Apple and many others are going to be pushing greater-than-HD screens in virtually all mid-to-high end laptops, tablets and all-in-one desktops. I work in the media in the tech industry, and this is coming straight from the horse's mouth. The longer Canon lags on resolution, the more exposed its relatively soft video will be on mid-to-high level new computers-- and for an increasing number of people (especially millenials), those computer screens are more important than TVs.

All the above said, one wild card here is the new processor. Canon stuck some relatively ancient tech in the first round of C-series cameras, and it's possible the C100 Mark II produces a materially better images than its predecessor-- all while offering improved autofocus and refined ergonomics. If you're making money on jobs today, this new camera is a viable option-- especially since if you're making money, you'll be able to upgrade to a new camera when the time is right. But for the enthusiast market, or even prosumers who expect even a small degree of future-proofing (e.g. will the new C100 be lamentably dated in two years? Yes, it will), Canon's not trying all that hard.

What new processor? The prosumer camcorders have DIGIC DV4 processors in them, and even those are 2013 tech.
 

SPG

EOS M50
Jun 17, 2013
25
0
Tugela said:
...
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.

It became the standard because at the time it delivered the best image for the price, but that is no longer true. People still use them because they have them and/or are locked into the brand for one reason or another. More advanced cameras from other manufacturers will take longer to achieve overall market penetration because people don't replace their cameras every year, but eventually they will get that market share if Canon continues to be way behind the ball.

Now days there are better options at lower price points. If Canon think that they will continue to dominate the market simply because the dominated the market in the past, they are in for a rude awakening.
[/quote]
I'm curious about what you think delivers a better image for the price right now. There might be some good options for enthusiasts, like the GH4 (even though it's image isn't nearly as pleasing as the C100), but I don't see too much that can handle a real production environment. FS700 is a slomo machine and looks nice with an Odyssey 7Q and more time in post, but that's more money and more parts to deal with. I don't see much else that's available now that really can give you that kind of C series image with an ergonomic and reliable setup and as streamlined a workflow.
A good indicator to look at what people really want to use is the rental market. What's the hottest rental camera right now? C300. That's a good indicator right there since rentals aren't as tied in to the existing infrastructure. Let's see what happens once the Sony FS7 is out there in numbers. That camera is the only one that I can see really knocking the C300 off its perch.
 

Tugela

EOS R
Feb 12, 2014
873
23
SPG said:
With a night's rest I still am not impressed with the update, but my disappointment is tempered a bit.
The C100 II is nice, and the improvements are welcome, but I have to look at it as just a stopgap measure. Yes, it fixes most of the original complaints but I was really hoping it would go past that and truly innovate or have the specs that will keep it a relevant camera for the next few years. The internal downsample to HD from the 4k sensor that all the C series cameras do is beautiful. There is no debate on that. But unfortunately there are some needs for actual 4k footage out there too. Shooting for TV in Japan is all being requested in 4k already. It's not 100% yet, but it's the standard now and you have to have a good reason not to be providing 4k. Shows here in the US are doing more in 4k just for reframing in edit and "future proofing" <- in quotes because most of that will never see the light of day again after it airs, but the producers want it anyway. A lot of these guys saw the HD transition and the loss of value in 4:3 SD content so I don't blame them.
With the C100 II Canon has made a very nice camera for today. For next year? It'll still hold up. After that? Well I can make space on the shelf of obsolete tech.

The problem is that in that price range the video processing is handled in hardware by the processor, and the DIGIC DV4 chip (which is the video equivalent of the DIGIC 6 processor) is a two year old design without 4K capabilities.

So, until they get around to making a DIGIC 7/DV5 series of processors, we are not going to see 4K from Canon.

I think that is probably the main reason why they are so laggard compared to competitors like Panasonic and Sony - they lack market foresight and were taken by surprise with the speed 4K arrived, so they were not ready for it.

We will probably see 4K options when the next round of processors comes available, until then Canon will continue to produce these obsolete updates to their equipment. My big worry about that is by the time they do get around to 4K, it will be 30p 4K and by then Panasonic/Sony will have moved on to 60p, 120p or more. Canon seem to be on the back foot most of the time.
 

Tugela

EOS R
Feb 12, 2014
873
23
SPG said:
Tugela said:
...
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.

It became the standard because at the time it delivered the best image for the price, but that is no longer true. People still use them because they have them and/or are locked into the brand for one reason or another. More advanced cameras from other manufacturers will take longer to achieve overall market penetration because people don't replace their cameras every year, but eventually they will get that market share if Canon continues to be way behind the ball.

Now days there are better options at lower price points. If Canon think that they will continue to dominate the market simply because the dominated the market in the past, they are in for a rude awakening.
I'm curious about what you think delivers a better image for the price right now. There might be some good options for enthusiasts, like the GH4 (even though it's image isn't nearly as pleasing as the C100), but I don't see too much that can handle a real production environment. FS700 is a slomo machine and looks nice with an Odyssey 7Q and more time in post, but that's more money and more parts to deal with. I don't see much else that's available now that really can give you that kind of C series image with an ergonomic and reliable setup and as streamlined a workflow.
A good indicator to look at what people really want to use is the rental market. What's the hottest rental camera right now? C300. That's a good indicator right there since rentals aren't as tied in to the existing infrastructure. Let's see what happens once the Sony FS7 is out there in numbers. That camera is the only one that I can see really knocking the C300 off its perch.
[/quote]

Mostly people use brand X because it is brand X, no other reason. They heard than Canon is good and so they use that, but that can change very quickly, particularly if one of the other manufacturers starts to be seen as the "best". Professionals are not immune to that sort of behaviour, reading current rental practice as an indicator of the future is a big mistake.

It is like people who buy iPhones. They buy into the marketing hype that "it is the best", and will swear blind to that even though they have no idea what other phones can and will do. So they line up to buy them on the day it is released.
 

Khnnielsen

EOS M6 Mark II
Sep 13, 2014
86
0
When I look at the C100 MkII, I can help but think, that this is the camera, which Canon should/could have announced two years ago instead of the original C100.
 

peederj

EOS RP
Mar 2, 2012
293
0
Technical write-up on a preproduction FS7: http://www.dvinfo.net/article/acquisition/sonyxdcam/first-look-sony-pxw-fs7-l-s-s-shoulder-mount-camcorder-part-1.html

Canon only has the C500, at more than twice the price and far worse ergonomics, to compete with the FS7 right now. Sony is running away with the market.

The EVF and OLED on the C100mk2 are nice, but they're still in the wrong places. The necessity for external recorders to get high bitrates is also obsolete (it's excusable for RAW but that's it at this point). Canon's product cycles tend to be long and that's why this is a concerning development; they absolutely need an FS7 competitor delivered by NAB or they are going to be left in the dust.

The one really nice thing the Canons have going for them are the included ND and IR filters, partly enabled by their long flange distance. But the flexibility of the mirrorless mount on the FS7 can't be denied, and Canon's EOS-M mount was a spectacular failure and can't support full frame 135 sensors anyway. Sony has been calling all the right shots and finally with the FS7 pulled together a product with all the checkmarks. Three years ago, the C300/C100 were great options, and they still have a few advantages left over the Sonys, but absolutely not enough to sway purchase decisions at this point. The fact Canon have yet to respond to the Nikon D800 even is suggestive of serious difficulties in their pipeline. That said, they retain market leadership largely due to their absolute successes in 2012 and earlier and the inertia of people's lens collections.
 
Oct 12, 2011
447
0
www.carolineculler.com
peederj said:
Technical write-up on a preproduction FS7: http://www.dvinfo.net/article/acquisition/sonyxdcam/first-look-sony-pxw-fs7-l-s-s-shoulder-mount-camcorder-part-1.html

Canon only has the C500, at more than twice the price and far worse ergonomics, to compete with the FS7 right now. Sony is running away with the market.

Talk about the specs all you want, the images we've seen (which is pretty much nothing) out of the FS7 don't compete with the C300. Let's remember Sony has their own high end market to protect as well.

Again, let's remember what people were saying about the FS700 as the Canon Cinema killer:

http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=5136.
 

Niki

EOS 90D
May 30, 2013
136
0
Tugela said:
SPG said:
Tugela said:
...
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.

It became the standard because at the time it delivered the best image for the price, but that is no longer true. People still use them because they have them and/or are locked into the brand for one reason or another. More advanced cameras from other manufacturers will take longer to achieve overall market penetration because people don't replace their cameras every year, but eventually they will get that market share if Canon continues to be way behind the ball.

Now days there are better options at lower price points. If Canon think that they will continue to dominate the market simply because the dominated the market in the past, they are in for a rude awakening.
I'm curious about what you think delivers a better image for the price right now. There might be some good options for enthusiasts, like the GH4 (even though it's image isn't nearly as pleasing as the C100), but I don't see too much that can handle a real production environment. FS700 is a slomo machine and looks nice with an Odyssey 7Q and more time in post, but that's more money and more parts to deal with. I don't see much else that's available now that really can give you that kind of C series image with an ergonomic and reliable setup and as streamlined a workflow.
A good indicator to look at what people really want to use is the rental market. What's the hottest rental camera right now? C300. That's a good indicator right there since rentals aren't as tied in to the existing infrastructure. Let's see what happens once the Sony FS7 is out there in numbers. That camera is the only one that I can see really knocking the C300 off its perch.

Mostly people use brand X because it is brand X, no other reason. They heard than Canon is good and so they use that, but that can change very quickly, particularly if one of the other manufacturers starts to be seen as the "best". Professionals are not immune to that sort of behaviour, reading current rental practice as an indicator of the future is a big mistake.

It is like people who buy iPhones. They buy into the marketing hype that "it is the best", and will swear blind to that even though they have no idea what other phones can and will do. So they line up to buy them on the day it is released.
[/quote]

for advertising work I shoot onKodak with a super 35mm camera for high end work
for everything else c300…

I think this is only the tip of the iceberg from canon…will there be a c3002 ..a c200 c400 c600??
 

peederj

EOS RP
Mar 2, 2012
293
0
In the realm of subjective argument, there are far more factors outside the camera that influence image quality, but even within the camera the problems that 1700lph can solve in practice (framing, stabilization, jump cuts, etc.) probably overwhelm considerations of a baked-in "look" via camera color science settings. Then there are the ergonomic factors of whether you can get more setups done in a shoot day because the camera already has everything in place and is portable rather than requiring rigging.

If you have a shot worth fussing over, fine, hire a great colorist if necessary. But the hard part is getting that shot worth fussing over and right now I'd rather be armed with an FS7 than a C300/C100. In 2012 I would rather have the C300/C100 than the FS700, and acted on that preference, but Sony has really swept past Canon now. There are still moments that the Canons will outshine the Sonys, but they are few and far between, and with a bit of rigging (e.g. a hot IR mirror, better lighting, etc.) the differences can be overcome.
 

jeremypark

Sydney Photographer Jeremy Park
Apr 21, 2013
14
0
47
Sydney
www.jeremypark.com.au
As a c100 owner I feel the best part of the update seems to be the firmware update we all wanted on our existing c100's with added 60p. The AF face detection would also be handy for those of us who've paid for the dual pixel unlocking. Otherwise the camera seems very similar with the much need EV upgrade. I guess those who are disappointed might try to think of this as an upgrade... it's not a new series of camera.

Makes me wonder if this may give clues to someone to unlock firmware on older c100's for 60p?
 

peederj

EOS RP
Mar 2, 2012
293
0
The C100mk1 has the third generation chip in it, the C100mk2 has the fourth generation chip. So the new firmware won't work on the old camera. There may be improvements in the IQ enabled by the new chip beyond the 60p, we'll have to see.
 

gsealy

EOS RP
Jan 3, 2014
345
14
peederj said:
The C100mk1 has the third generation chip in it, the C100mk2 has the fourth generation chip. So the new firmware won't work on the old camera. There may be improvements in the IQ enabled by the new chip beyond the 60p, we'll have to see.

I would not be so quick to say "So the new firmware won't work on the old camera". The new chip might support the same instruction set as the previous one, and have the same registers and so on. It's just that it has faster and newer components. Can a person usually upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 8 without purchasing a new processor? Yes.
 
Apr 19, 2011
4,761
1
HurtinMinorKey said:
LetTheRightLensIn said:
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.

But you still have to agree that the 5D3 Raw kills cams like the GH4 for overall image quality.

Yeah, IF you shoot it with the ML RAW. It is pretty fine for 1080P if you do that. The disk space and all gets to be tiresome after a while, but it is nice.
 

Mitch.Conner

It was all a lie.
Nov 7, 2013
537
0
So do the new kits apply to the Mark II or the original C100? Seems odd timing to announce new kits for the C100 and C300 and then immediately the next day announce, "HEY EVERYBODY, WE'RE REPLACING THE C100!! PLEASE BUY THOSE KITS ANYWAYS!"
 

peederj

EOS RP
Mar 2, 2012
293
0
Well if they do that it's not going to be targeted at video as such, it will be slanted as the ultimate tool for the dreaded "spray & pray" stills shooter. So if they forget mechanical shutter and just go with an electronic shutter, they can get the frame rate up to 30fps and stream frames out to the faster storage cards available in that era. This will be "video" but it will likely have poor DR, poor low-light, poor compression, and/or poor rolling shutter performance, as they are having to read from nearly all of a 36 megapixel sensor continuously.

But fair enough some people may actually enjoy trying to work with 8K video files for motion. I don't think that will be practical quite as soon as 2016 but by the end of the decade sure.

I am generally against continuous drive for stills shooting outside of fast action shots. It is not photography to me. Photography is about recognizing the right time to release the shutter by looking through the viewfinder. Spray & pray detaches you from the moment (and on optical VFs blocks your view of the subject). I will not be shooting 8K video for stills and I doubt I would for motion. The GH4 has barely 1080p resolution in its 4K mode as it is, their rendition of "consumer 8K" will probably have less than 2000lph.

pbr9 said:
 

skoobey

EOS 90D
Jun 12, 2013
120
0
Still no 4K?

I'm sorry, are you living under a rock???

This better be dirt cheap!

And I've had experience with the current model, it is a great camera, especially with the auto focus upgrade, but ability to crop is essential in what you would consider a cinema camera. This is just plain sad.
 
<-- start Taboola -->