I don't think you get it what I'm saying. Young DPs start out with low end equipment like A7SIIs and GH5s. Then they graduate to FS7s, and maybe one day, a CineAlta. MILCs are not replacements for serious cinema cameras nor are meant to be. But it's important to get people in the ecosystem. I'd wager someone who has used an A7S and then an FS7 is more likely to use a CineAlta than a Canon. Of course, ARRI has the corner on the market for now and we'll see if Sony FF or Canon FF can make a dent.LDS said:
Canon officially announces the C700 Full Frame
- Thread starter canonnews
- Start date
I think that by referencing the 5D MKII that they are alluding to a 4k FF DSLR or MILC without crop and probably 422 Clog & 30 FPS without crop or at super 35 crop mode in the near future as both a gateway into their Cinema line, and as a companion. I remember they made a big deal about how easy it was to match the 5D MK II to the digital cinema cameras at the time. Bay used up dozens of them when filming Transformers, as sad as it was to see so many canons destroyed, they got the shots they wanted. Big production companies want DSLRs and MILCs they can beat up for stunt / action shots, and B shots, that can pair up with something like the C700. On the other side, one might argue that that is what the C200B is for.
On a different note, the C100 MK is getting passed up by most indie filmmakers now (even though I still love mine for shorts), and the C200s RAW Light is restricted to CFAST cards, which makes it stupidly expensive. We went with a C300 MK 2 and Atomos recorders, and it came out to be cheaper than rigging out a c200 with enough CFAST cards for a shoot. That being said, Canon put itself in a box where it doesn't really have a decent 4k entry point that shoots in log, and for that matter, even not in log...
On a different note, the C100 MK is getting passed up by most indie filmmakers now (even though I still love mine for shorts), and the C200s RAW Light is restricted to CFAST cards, which makes it stupidly expensive. We went with a C300 MK 2 and Atomos recorders, and it came out to be cheaper than rigging out a c200 with enough CFAST cards for a shoot. That being said, Canon put itself in a box where it doesn't really have a decent 4k entry point that shoots in log, and for that matter, even not in log...
How many CFAST cards you need for a shoot really depends on what you're doing. For a lot of short form work a two or three 256gb cards is plenty. For a lot of other types it's not a problem to offload one card to an external drive while you shoot on another. If you're shooting 6 hours of documentary footage a day you almost certainly dont want to be shooting RAW anyway.CanonGrunt said:
Given the cost difference between C300mkii + Atomos + drives VS C200 how many cards were you looking at? 4 x 256GB CFAST cards are US$1500... Here in NZ theres NZD4,500 (about US$3K) between just the camera bodies. If I add in an external recorder and drives I could get 12x 256GB cards - or six hours of RAWlite footage - and have some change left over.
That said, if you are shooting huge quantities of material for broadcast the 10bit C300 is probably a better choice than the 8bit or RAW C200. I don't, so the C200 seemed to make sense. The 8bit 4K material is more than good enough for events and long-form stuff for the web and the internal RAW is awesome for shorter projects - and means I can shoot solo handheld RAW with DPAF if needed! Its a massive step up in just about every way from the C100mk1 I was using before.
Yeah, definitely depends on the specific project. We were shooting an indie feature, and a separate web series during the same time period, so it was easier to keep a few separate drives instead of a stack of cards.syder said:
Also we picked up the C300 MK 2 used for $6,000, so that made a big difference. I've seen them going for $7,000 pretty often in the used market.
I don't want to flame anybody so I'll just say this: I'd be embarrassed as heck to even suggest that the sensor tech from a $33,000 camera should be put in a FF stills camera. I had no idea people could be so detached from logic and common sense. Snowflakes indeed. Canon is doomed. :
Don’t see one of these in my future but I bet it’s pretty sweet wide open with some of that fast cinema glass. As others have said I’d assume this is targeted to the rental market. Important that this camera exists well beyond its actual sales value to Canon. Canon is playing the long game in cinema and there was an obvious need to fill this niche. Sensor density comparable to the original 5D so I don’t expect to see this sensor in a stills camera anytime soon.
I suppose all I need to do is read your name....but....I don't think people are saying that at all. I'm not asking for FF RAW or 4444 12bit in a dslr but Panasonic managed to squeeze 10bit 4:2:2 with log into their camera and also allow for 4k 10bit 422 60p out through HDMI. EVERYONE else gives a live histogram, zebras, log, and a codec that wasn't invented almost 30 YEARS AGO!!! The rolling shutter jello from the 5dmkIV is just sad.... 1.7crop?....I don't think canon is doomed, but as a red stripe pro shooter for over 10 years....I've thrown in the towel and moved over to Sony for my stills and Panny for my video. They play too many games with their models giving as little as possible to the consumer.CanonFanBoy said:I don't want to flame anybody so I'll just say this: I'd be embarrassed as heck to even suggest that the sensor tech from a $33,000 camera should be put in a FF stills camera. I had no idea people could be so detached from logic and common sense. Snowflakes indeed. Canon is doomed. :
Full frame 4k in a small body is not $33,000 tech. Sony do it for $2000. For Canon color science and DPAF I would pay up to $5000. That's literally all I want and ask for. I'm glad no one seems to think this will be used to justify keeping 4k FF out of a prosumer mirrorless, but I'm really skeptical.CanonFanBoy said:I don't want to flame anybody so I'll just say this: I'd be embarrassed as heck to even suggest that the sensor tech from a $33,000 camera should be put in a FF stills camera. I had no idea people could be so detached from logic and common sense. Snowflakes indeed. Canon is doomed. :
Nope, but I'd like to see some hardware codec & colorspace support. They've already taped out the hardware design for that.CanonFanBoy said:
Also +1 for Magic Lantern being the real hero for the 5D mk II. I've stuck with the Mk III because there is no ML on the 5D mk IV.
As far as I can tell Canon makes very nice cameras that seem to meet the needs of people who actually shoot video but they are not very good at making products that meet the needs of people who like to talk about shooting video on internet forums. But maybe I'm missing something.
I would say that Canon makes video cameras for people in the business of trying to make a living with the camera. Their big gaping hole is the lack of 4K 60p, not because it is necessarily needed for any logistical reason, but because most producers feel they need it. Due to this, the Sony FS7 has overtaken the Canon C300 II. The C100 is a great work horse in its market. The C700 is still trying to find its market, which may never happen. Comparisons to DSLR's are made by people who aren't in the market for a cinema camera in the first place.Graphic.Artifacts said:
Hang on. So Canon can make 15-stop DR sensors? Interesting. I know it's not still camera, but they can make it for still too, can't they?
Overtaken the C300 line? No. Not here anyway.cpreston said:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=34315.0
Nakean said:I suppose all I need to do is read your name...CanonFanBoy said:I don't want to flame anybody so I'll just say this: I'd be embarrassed as heck to even suggest that the sensor tech from a $33,000 camera should be put in a FF stills camera. I had no idea people could be so detached from logic and common sense. Snowflakes indeed. Canon is doomed. :
And what am I supposed to deduce from your screen name? You don't see sarcasm and wit in that little section around my photo? BTW: The market likes Canon pretty good. Us and our personal desires are not the market. Thinking what we personally want is what everyone, or even the majority is screaming for, is the market just ain't so. Canon does so well for a reason.http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=34315.0
And yet,cpreston said:
https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/explore/industries/film-tv/pro-markets-film-avengers
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls059550382/
I'm sure they could, but I'm not sure they will. The next full-frame camera expected to be released by Canon is either the new mirrorless or the 5DS II. It would be nice if the mirrorless offered 15 stops of DR, but that's probably too big of an ask for the 5DS II if they keep the pixel pitch as small as it is on the mark 1.Quarkcharmed said:
4K60P over-crank is a useful thing. You can use it to stabilize hand-held inserts and cutaways, as well as other MOS shots. I wish Canon would offer it, but it's not a deal-breaker in most cases. It just requires some extra planning so that you have an over-crank-capable camera around when you need it.cpreston said:
Valid points in both cases regarding 60p. The 60p on the 1DXII is quite good by most accounts but then you have all the inherent issues of having to shoot with a DSLR. Not sure why Canon hasn't addressed that but may be due to read rates and rolling shutter where the IDX's are very good. Personally I don't use 60p much because it's not fast enough for good slow motion and too edgy and jittery for almost anything else. Watching 4k 60p for too long gives me a headache and conforming down to 30p never seems to look right. But, I'm primarily a stills shoot so far from an expert at such things and I can understand that many people would consider that a must have even if they don't use it everyday.
As someone who works in the industry, this is a big deal for two reasons:
1) Canon has a sensor upgradable cinema camera. I doubt this will be a one-time deal, as they have conveniently placed their office that does hardware upgrades in the same neighborhood as ARRI. My guess is they are looking to take their business while RED continues to offer cameras that make post a budget and workflow nightmare.
2) Canon is going to continue evolving their cinema lenses for FF and DPAF. This means further growth in their Cine-Servo series. Hopefully we also see anamorphic Canon glass. Because you cannot readily swap a PL mount in for the EF mount, Canon must be working on anamorphic glass.
It lands in July and we are already deep in development and shooting this year. The industry has bounced back after last year and demand will be high. Looking forward to seeing the C700 FF on set.
1) Canon has a sensor upgradable cinema camera. I doubt this will be a one-time deal, as they have conveniently placed their office that does hardware upgrades in the same neighborhood as ARRI. My guess is they are looking to take their business while RED continues to offer cameras that make post a budget and workflow nightmare.
2) Canon is going to continue evolving their cinema lenses for FF and DPAF. This means further growth in their Cine-Servo series. Hopefully we also see anamorphic Canon glass. Because you cannot readily swap a PL mount in for the EF mount, Canon must be working on anamorphic glass.
It lands in July and we are already deep in development and shooting this year. The industry has bounced back after last year and demand will be high. Looking forward to seeing the C700 FF on set.
