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

[crazyrunner33]

Pretty bold statement. Do you have scientific facts to prove your point or are these just your personal feelings? PS: I would prefer a FF camera with no video at all. There are a multitude of excellent video cameras available. Not so much for stills only cameras. Not sure why people feel that insulting someone in their comments is so fashionable...could it be the anonymity of the internet?

While photography isn't going out of fashion, video is definitely the hot commodity in the marketing world. This is mainly due to the way social media platforms prioritize posts. Unfortunately, my workload has transitioned to mostly video. Usually two versions of each video, 16:9 and 1:1 with open captioning.

Events will still be dominated by photography, and I'd love to transition more into that world.

 

[bluediablo]

Sounds more like Canon doesn't care about you.

You talking out of your ass telling people they're relics and too stupid to understand their needs makes it a bit easier for me to understand why Canon would like to lose you as a customer.

+1000

 

[max_sr]

What I don't get are the statements that Canon won't put better video features into their DSLRs and mirrorless cameras to "protect" their cinema cameras.

First, not everyone has thousands of $$ to spend on something that just does video. Second many people shoot stills and video, so why not give them a camera that can do both equally well?

And the last point is, that this makes no sense. Someone, who is just starting with video (and who also shoots stills) will never buy a C200 as a second body to his EOS XY. But someone, who gets a true Canon hybrid camera and lots of lenses for it, uses it for all kinds of videos and so on, might eventually buy a Canon cinema camera once their skills/needs have reached that kind of level.
However, if this person instead buys a Sony or Panasonic hybrid camera, they most likely will buy an Sony or Panasonic Cinema camera later on, because they will have invested lots of $$ into those ecosystems.
So in the end Canon is losing 2 or more) camera sales and lots of lens sales just because they are trying to "protect" their cinema line. Makes no sense.

 

[proutprout]

It’s true actually, i’m waiting desperately for a video body, but maybe i’m just going to end up buying Sony. I’m getting tired to wait for half functionnal cameras. At least Sony will get us what we want !

 

[PureClassA]

GREAT post. Yeah, I'm a CPS GOLD member for years and have nearly 100 CPS points. This RP is a total punch in the face for video folks. I'm still primarily a stills guy, but like you, CR, I've been find more opportunities to shoot video for hire. 4k24 is great but no 1080p24 is utterly absurd, and I have NO idea what Canon was thinking with this.

 

[PureClassA]

2 crazy things is that canon had the first 4k dslr back in like 2012. and then the 1dx II has 4k 60p and 120 1080p. so their cameras are capable of good video modes. this has to be just nerfing on purpose or the digic 8 is crap. I just say that because there is a lot of talk about canon cant do certain thing because of the processors but a 3 year old camera is killing it even compared to their 2019 line up.

Yes but even the 1DX2 was strategically crippled by restricting HDMI output to 1080p instead of the full 4K it's capable of.... I own one.... it's frustrating that a $6000 top of the line camera was deliberately kneecapped like that for no reason in 2016/2017.

 

[tmroper]

Canon sometimes acts in annoying and inexplicably irrational ways. The company spends much time and money getting the body right. It also cripples camera performance that accomplishes nothing more than to annoy its customers. Why? Who?

And Canon resists adding features with firmware updates. Why? Who?

And so much time and money creating fantastic lenses. World-class glass, and then this thing? Which doesn't sound like a horrible camera for the price, and if you want only stills. But it's at odds with the lens roadmap.

 

[slclick]

I really need some sort of ad blocker to take anything VIDEO out of my internet feed. Hell, it's to the point where C vs N vs S, or DR battles are easier to stomach than another video beotch session.

 

[Nelu]

It’s true actually, i’m waiting desperately for a video body, but maybe i’m just going to end up buying Sony. I’m getting tired to wait for half functionnal cameras. At least Sony will get us what we want !

Don't forget to close the door on your way out!

 

[sdz]

And so much time and money creating fantastic lenses. World-class glass, and then this thing? Which doesn't sound like a horrible camera for the price, and if you want only stills. But it's at odds with the lens roadmap.

I do not plan to buy the RP. I spend money on lenses. I might buy the R once the price drops. I might not. That said, I almost admire Canon for the products they make, the quality of their lenses, the color produced by their cameras. I have owned five since 2000. I bought into the system, the brand. But, Canon makes some products defined, in part, by head scratching 'gotchas.' The RP is one of those products. I expect Canon to sell many RPs.

 

[dtaylor]

Guys...Canon is not reading this thread. If you feel passionately about this then you need to email Canon directly.

 

[Otara]

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.

Just watched an otherwise lovely video by my nephew with this exact issue.

If you're buying an entry level camera they're going to make it entry level, for video and for stills. Nothing to do about cost to do so. They will presumably consider changing when another company releases a new full frame with 24p at this price point.

 

[nchoh]

I noticed that there weren't many of the regular Canon positive posters on this thread. I guess that's what happens when the CanonRumorsGuy himself invites a Canon bashing.

 

[bergstrom]

I won't be buying an R for a long time, if ever, happy with my dslr's

 

[slclick]

Guys...Canon is not reading this thread. If you feel passionately about this then you need to email Canon directly.

Oh man, I wish someone would have told me this 3000 posts ago.

 

[Jethro]

I'm a 'virtually never' video user, so this would frankly form a very minor consideration for me (actually not at all as I have the EOS R). But, it is (for once) an actual 'nerf', and it's fair to ask why? Cynically, you could say it's to push people wanting these features up to the EOS R price point, or to more specialised cameras? The whole EOS/RF release program has been heavily marketing & segmentation-driven, so it could be an actual strategy.

 

[dtaylor]

The person who made these two decisions should be fired and once on its way out, should pack the guy who had final go for the 6DII sensor's decision.

I'm not going to defend Canon on the video decisions. The RP should have 1080 24p as well as 1080 crop modes. There's no technical reason for not having them. If Canon is afraid that newbie users will get poor footage with 24p (panning or monitor frame rate mismatches) then they can hide it behind a custom function just like extended ISOs. 1080 crop should be an always available option that is automatically engaged with an EF-S lens attached.

As for 4k: it's clear that Canon has a sensor readout speed issue even with the latest 5D IV sensor architecture. That's what's killing them on FF 4k, and 4k + DPAF at any crop on lower end sensors (FF or APS-C). They're probably still working on replacement sensors that can handle the required video readout speeds across the line. (I debated this with someone on this forum at one time, but now I forget who. On reflection I'm convinced they were right.)

Given that reality, if they were going to release the RP right now then they had to use an existing sensor design. The only candidate is the 6D2 sensor unless they were going to drop down to 20mp and use the 1DX2 sensor. Maybe they should have done that. Though we associate the 1DX2 sensor with the cost of the body the sensor itself likely costs little to manufacture at this point. Canon marketing would have a fit because a cheaper camera would have better video specs than the 5D IV or the R. But given the stills limitations on the RP body you're probably not cannibalizing 5D4/R sales so much as adding to them. At the same time you're preventing video guys from fleeing to Sony or Fuji. It might cannibalize some 1DX2 sales (those that are exclusively for video) but as Canon Rumors Guy pointed out, in business if you don't cannibalize your own products a competitor will.

As an example, I would have preordered an RP if it had the 1DX2's sensor and video specs without any stupid compromises to "protect" the trickle of 1DX2-for-video sales. As is I will pass. For that matter, I would probably buy an R body at the R's price point if it had the 1DX2's sensor and video specs. Maybe Canon should have done that instead. Maybe they still should since they could throw it together fast and it would stop the bleeding of EF lens owners who want solid video.

All of that said: I have and will defend the 6D2 sensor on stills. If you're a stills shooter looking at your first FF the 6D2/RP sensor is notably better at low ISO than the 21mp sensors Michael Riechmann was using to produce large fine art prints back around the turn of the decade. It's far and away better than those sensors were at high ISO and competitive with other sensors on the market today. It's also a good 1 stop better at high ISO than the other cheap FF option, the Sony A72.

 

[Etienne]

What I don't get are the statements that Canon won't put better video features into their DSLRs and mirrorless cameras to "protect" their cinema cameras.

First, not everyone has thousands of $$ to spend on something that just does video. Second many people shoot stills and video, so why not give them a camera that can do both equally well?

And the last point is, that this makes no sense. Someone, who is just starting with video (and who also shoots stills) will never buy a C200 as a second body to his EOS XY. But someone, who gets a true Canon hybrid camera and lots of lenses for it, uses it for all kinds of videos and so on, might eventually buy a Canon cinema camera once their skills/needs have reached that kind of level.
However, if this person instead buys a Sony or Panasonic hybrid camera, they most likely will buy an Sony or Panasonic Cinema camera later on, because they will have invested lots of $$ into those ecosystems.
So in the end Canon is losing 2 or more) camera sales and lots of lens sales just because they are trying to "protect" their cinema line. Makes no sense.

Exactly. Why would I buy a C300 and have to pair it with one of these EOS-R or RP, when I could buy a FS7 and pair it with an A7III or upcoming A7sIII. Most people want to stay in one system for simplicity. Canon is banking almost entirely on the superiority of their lenses. How long will that last?

To be honest, I really want this EOS-R for photography, but I'm not going to buy one because it's another piece of equipment that can't double in video, so I would most often leave it at home.

 

[Kit.]

I really need some sort of ad blocker to take anything VIDEO out of my internet feed. Hell, it's to the point where C vs N vs S, or DR battles are easier to stomach than another video beotch session.

If you use Firefox, NoScript is quite good.

 

[slclick]

If you use Firefox, NoScript is quite good.

I was joking but thanks for the advice. I can self moderate....how else could I have lived through AvTvM and the like around here for years?

I'm one of those knuckleheads that wishes Canon would put out a stills only body, never gonna happen.