Cinema EOS Development Opinion

[JR]

Well, I really do hope the hybrid camera coming up will give us all this. One thing for sure from a marketing perspective, the video aspect is giving Canon an excuse to go to a lower MP camera architecture and not loose face. Remember they have made a point for a long time that MP is important, so you cant all of a sudden change your mind (well you can but for a corporation you need to play with this image carefully).

I think for Canon branding the next few move are critical but are likely very well planned, and it is likely not without reason that we have yet to ear about the 5D II replacement. They are just not there yet in there chess game. My two cents...

 

[AG]

Looking at the prices of the new cinema lenses, it seems videographers have no problem spending more.

Just because Canon is pricing the new lenses at $45-48k for the zooms and $6,800 for EACH of the primes doesn't mean the video community can readily afford these products. At those steep prices, I'd have to have a huge project with an intense need in order to justify that expense. With most of the low and restricted mid range budgets these days, I have a feeling that many will be sticking with their current lens lineup for awhile to come.

Firstly unless you are working in a film production house or television studio, the zoom lenses are not marketed at yourself.

And the Primes with their MSRT of $6800 is not that bad, especially when you take into consideration that this is not street price.
How many amateur photographers do you see walking around with a Sigma 200-500? (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/551435-REG/Sigma_597101_200_500mm_f_2_8_EX_DG.html)
Ok i understand that its a $25,000 lens but its also not something that the average Joe will want for his kit.

The same goes for these lenses, they are aimed at the semi pro/advanced amateur videographer, that is using EOS equipment and wants to take it a step beyond a basic Canon 50mm f1.2 for filming (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/457680-GREY/Canon_1257B002AA_Normal_EF_50mm_f_1_2L.html) which is $1500 by itself and not really designed for video.

 

[Cannon Man]

I love all the news we have had over the past week and i cant wait till the 1DX comes available! BUT im a little fustrated if canon doesnt make a studio orientated 1D.

I thought Canon was all about high quality cameras for taking PICTURES. And with the announcement of the C300 that is almost 20 000$ and lenses that are up to 47 000$

Compared to the quality that comes with that high price my 1D IV is starting to feel like cheap toy.

I want to know that im using the best available gear from Canon.
Now Canon has shown with this announcement that they can make a 6800$ 85mm prime lens, i feel like my 85mm 1.2L II USM is not even close to as good as it could be.

When will i be able to buy a 20 000$ 1D camera with 7000$ prime lenses with AF??

 

[Jettatore]

Pedro wrote:
'"'Looking forward to it. Don't care if the 5Diii won't materialize in 2012. ""

Yeah same here. I don't mind at all if the 5D III or renamed equivalent that I have been waiting for doesn't come out until late '12 or early/mid '13, I'm ready to buy it whenever it launches.

 

[traveller]

Pedro wrote:
'"'Looking forward to it. Don't care if the 5Diii won't materialize in 2012. ""

Yeah same here. I don't mind at all if the 5D III or renamed equivalent that I have been waiting for doesn't come out until late '12 or early/mid '13, I'm ready to buy it whenever it launches.

I disagree, 2012 looks like it will be an important year for the industry and Canon need to address weaknesses in its line-up, or risk losing further market share to Nikon and Sony. The 1D X and this 'Cinema EOS' stuff is fine for the professionals, but now Canon needs to look at the enthusiast and mirrorless market.

If the rumoured D800 really was delayed by the floods in Thailand, then Canon will need a strong 5D MkII repacement in 2012 not 2013, which addresses its predecessor's weaknesses without pricing itself out of the market (e.g. by trying to be a 1Ds series replacement).

They also need to do something about mirrorless trend and it needs to be as strong and decisive as launching 'Cinema EOS'. If they fail to provide this next year it will be Nikon and Sony's gain; people have waited to see Canon's hand, but they won't wait forever.

 

[bsbeamer]

The problems you face here have got nothing to do with the price of Canon's lenses and everything to do with the way you run your business and market it to customers as there's nothing stopping you from shooting cheap like others do except yourself.

Shooting "cheap" is something that I'd recommend anyone with an ounce of professionalism to avoid doing. Shooting within budget however, is what I'd recommend everyone to always do. "Cheap" has so many meanings to it, many which have a negative connotation to them...

This can bring up the philosophical difference of what separates a professional from some guy running around with a Flip camera, or the corporate PR guy who records a speaker at a podium with his iPhone... Not saying you can't make something worthwhile with cameras like that, but there are much better tools available these days for someone who does this kinda thing more often and makes a living out of it.

These $45-48k lenses and $6800 primes aren't geared to someone on mid-range projects like mine. I know that, Canon knows that. I will continue to use the same gear that I currently utilize to get the job done. I've been satisfied with it and they get the job done. Until those tools stop performing to my expectations (and client expectations) I'll probably continue to do so.

 

[bsbeamer]

Firstly unless you are working in a film production house or television studio, the zoom lenses are not marketed at yourself.

And the Primes with their MSRT of $6800 is not that bad, especially when you take into consideration that this is not street price.
How many amateur photographers do you see walking around with a Sigma 200-500? (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/551435-REG/Sigma_597101_200_500mm_f_2_8_EX_DG.html)
Ok i understand that its a $25,000 lens but its also not something that the average Joe will want for his kit.

The same goes for these lenses, they are aimed at the semi pro/advanced amateur videographer, that is using EOS equipment and wants to take it a step beyond a basic Canon 50mm f1.2 for filming (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/457680-GREY/Canon_1257B002AA_Normal_EF_50mm_f_1_2L.html) which is $1500 by itself and not really designed for video.

I agree completely with the zooms. If you are going to be using these lenses close to DAILY then there are lots of reasons to invest in them. If you have a larger scale project with a budget that can support it, there's another reason. But for the majority of folks out there, these zooms aren't going to be purchased for use on a regular basis anytime soon.

As for the primes, I think they are competitively priced within the market. Street price on them will probably bring them relatively close in price to the RED prime series, and at least on paper the Canon's seem to outperform them. The available focal lengths for the "complete series" aren't enough to abandon an existing kit, but these lenses will probably be really popular to people shooting on many different cameras. It would be really interesting to see if Canon adds any additional focal lengths in the next year, or if they offer discounted kit prices like RED and Zeiss do.

 

[Jettatore]

IRT traveller:

Mirrorless really doesn't change the end result of digital photography at this point in time. It doesn't really even change that much, the way in which the user operates the device. It merely allows the lenses to be mounted closer to the sensor which has some technical differences and in order to leverage it for smaller equipment requires all new, smaller, re-designed lenses, yet, there already are product lines for this, that's Panasonic and others.

At the end of the day, especially if you are a competent editor, digital photography is sort of settled. We'll continue to get faster speeds, better ISO/less noise to a point, etc. There's also medium and large format considerations, which have great IQ and usually have slower lenses due to the nature of physics. And other than High ISO at low noise which is starting to show up rapidly, and the ability to print HUGE while in high detail which medium and large format already covers, -this game is figured out. The people left who can't create amazing images just aren't good artists, don't grasp digital editing (which is the equivalent of the darkroom developing process and is highly important) and they just need more practice.

The innovations to come, will mostly be in lower prices and converging technologies (like video and photo being done affordable in one unit, which we are already in the middle of). The rest of this non-sense is about money, and we all see how well that is going for the world.

Humans continue to do things in outdated weird ways. I mean, we go down to the camera shop to look at what's on the shelf and if something sucks and no one buys it, it eventually ends up in some garbage pile next to a rain forest along side all of our recently obsoleted garbage (and doesn't make for the nicest nature photography...) Would make more sense to be making the equipment on demand with on-sight recycling for botched and obsolete designs. Would be fun if the Camera manufacturing plants were eventually turned into a "public works resource" where people of all ages and skill levels could go to learn and create their own cameras and whatnot (same for all other fields, music equipment, computers, etc.). The market/money and marketing are creating a lot of needless waste and they are slowing down the progression of technology.

Of interesting note to the above, a digital camera sensor is basically the same thing as a solar cell (which we obviously all need to start getting involved in), an array of PIN photodiodes. When light hits these diodes that make up the sensor, electrons are collected. Now in digital photography, these values are counted/organized and stored on disk and then read back later on a monitor etc., as your pixel values that you would see in photoshop. In solar energy mediums, these same electrons would be stored for their energy in something like a battery, or converted into some other form of energy, like water heat. The point being, if the people take over the development of Photography and Solar, we'll all be a bit smarter, we won't kill ourselves and the planet, and we will all have the nicest cameras... Now how's that for some innovative vision and IQ, or do you still just want a mirrorless camera body?

Here's a link to learning electrical engineering at home, from the beginning, it's like a 40+ hour, free, educational series some school posted on youtube, and it's awesome. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZEZUysFPDY&feature=relmfu

 

[traveller]

IRT Jettatore:

No I don't believe that mirrorless is currently a game changer, but with convergent technologies such as on chip phase detect AF and high resolution EVFs, it is probably the direction that camera technology is going. Once you don't need a mirror to provide an OVF and PDAF, why compromise your lens designs (particularly wide angle) to accomodate it? Canon needs a foothold in this market, or they'll end up in the position that Leica found themselves. There is also the problem of what's going to happen to their compact camera business with the next couple of generations of mobile 'phones.

People have been stating that digital cameras have reached a plateau for years; in the case of APS-C, I think they're correct. Full frame can probably get to 30-40MP with a trade-off of increased (or perhaps I should say, not decreased) higher ISO noise, before it starts geting into trouble with diffraction. If 21MP is good enough for you then great, stick with a 5D MkII (hope you're also fine with the two generation old AF and metering system), but I wouldn't make assumptions about other people's current or future output needs.

Thanks for the lecture on wasteful consumer technology, this could easily be applied to 95% of the cr*p that we spend our hard earned money on. If you're no longer interested in updating you gear because it meets all your needs and desires then that's great, just don't bleat about it on a camera rumours website.

 

[terryh2c]

It seems really simple to me. I'd like to go full-frame, but I'm simply not going to spend $2,300 on a 3 year old body -- especially when the product in question seems to be on a 3 year release cycle. Canon will not get my money until they release a new product. I'm sure there are many other people in my boat as well.

Agree. Why spend $2500 on a product at the very end of its product cycle?
And the update has been excruciatingly slow in being released, with endless focus (!) on video video video.
Companies like Canon amaze me - there are ten of thousands of people who bought their product before video was even a thought on a product feature list and yet they seem far more interested in developing new markets than providing their existing customers with product updates.

 

[AprilForever]

<div id=\"fb_share_1\" style=\"float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;\"><a name=\"fb_share\" type=\"box_count\" share_url=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/11/cinema-eos-development-opinion/\" 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/2011/11/cinema-eos-development-opinion/\"></a></div>
<strong>This is an opinion with a mix of speculation

</strong>A lot has been made of the “in development” announcement of a new “Cinema” branded DSLR. Most people seem to think the camera is going to be based on the 1D X.</p>
<p>I agree with <a href=\"http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_video.html\">Keith at Northlight Images</a>, nothing was said by Canon as to what the form factor would be. I think what they showed was just a 1D X body with a red “C” stuck on it for marketing purposes.</p>
<p>I think the camera they’re speaking of will sit between the 5D Mark III and 1D X. Perhaps an EOS 3C? I do not like the name “3D” for a camera that doesn’t actually shoot 3D.</p>
<p>I also don’t think it would be a full size EOS-1 body. They just spent a few hours touting the small stature of the C300, I don’t think they’d make a cinema DSLR bigger than it needs to be. I’d have to hear from cinematographers & videographers whether or not a camera the size of the 5D Mark II is preferred to the EOS-1 body.</p>
<p><strong>What about photographers?

</strong>I know a good majority of photographers are pretty tired about hearing about video in DSLRs. A lot of the community is looking for a new “photography first” full frame DSLR that doesn’t require remortgaging their homes. I think the 5D Mark III will be that camera. It’ll probably have video features on par with the 1D X, but will be a high resolution, high image quality still photography camera.</p>
<p>I’ve said before that I think Canon plans to monetize the videographers and video DSLRs, so something like the “EOS 3C” makes a lot of sense. Â Looking at the prices of the new cinema lenses, it seems videographers have no problem spending more.</p>
<p>So don’t be worried photographers, Canon hasn’t forgotten about you and I’m sure will deliver the product we all know you want.</p>
<p>It’s going to be a very interesting 2012 to say the least.</p>
<p><em>This was just an opinion post, please don’t be too hard on me.</em></p>
<p><strong><span style=\"color: #ff0000;\">c</span>r</strong></p>

I indeed am tired of hearing about video in my slr. If the 7D mk II had no video, it would not be even slightly bothered. Do I use my 7D video? Occassionaly, but if the lack of video kept price down, I would be happy. Or, if they just left the video the same, and focused on improving the still picture side of things, that would indeed make me much happier.

I'm a photographer, not a videographer!

 

[moreorless]

Once you don't need a mirror to provide an OVF and PDAF, why compromise your lens designs (particularly wide angle) to accomodate it?

I'v often heard this but really where has mirrorless shown advantages in cost, performance or size so far? The NEX lenses really don't seem to offer any of them over a relgular crop sensor. Nothing I'v seen so far really hints to me that a mirrorless system that offered the same functionality(IQ, lens linup, controls etc) as current DSLR systems would be a signifcant advanatge.

My guess would be that the mirrorless market will end up running alongside DSLR's, smaller sensor bodies offering DSLR functionality but lesser IQ and AF as they do now and larger sensor ones focusing on pancake primes that offer a much smaller system.

I'd guess Canon's seeming lack of action could well be down to putting extra devolpment time into a system to get it right aswell. Nikon and Pentax's systems just seem like rushed jobs to me and I don't see either of them having much sucess, to do that I think Canon either needs to come up with a large sensor mirrorless with a good range of small primes at launch or a smaller sensor one thats much cheaper than Nikon's effort.

 

[Jettatore]

irt: April, If anything, the quite large customer base video extras bring to the table helps them sell many more of the same units and also moves more lenses out the door which should help more than anything in keeping the cost of all this gear down for all of us involved. And if it doesn't, the problem wasn't the video inclusions...

 

[Edwin Herdman]

I indeed am tired of hearing about video in my slr. If the 7D mk II had no video, it would not be even slightly bothered. Do I use my 7D video? Occassionaly, but if the lack of video kept price down, I would be happy. Or, if they just left the video the same, and focused on improving the still picture side of things, that would indeed make me much happier.

I'm a photographer, not a videographer!

This is a fairly common argument. The most common valid evidence for excluding video that I've seen is that camera makers are dedicating buttons (at most one or two) to video (somebody recently called it a "Youtube button") instead of to features they use. Now, some cameras won't let you remap buttons using custom functions, and I don't know if any really will let you remap buttons that are dedicated to video currently. Out of the whole camera's interface, it would be a valid complaint (in the case of the "Youtube button" guy's camera, I think it was a dedicated ISO button in a specific advantageous location that was claimed to be lost, or something like that - don't recall which camera however). It's definitely a valid concern.

However, and just to repeat it again, Canon gets a heck of a lot of value out of having video, and so do many casual users. Nobody has ever demonstrated that it adds substantial cost to cameras - can you point to a price spike in cameras (not better explained by adjustments for inflation etc.)? I don't believe so. There really isn't any reason to believe that Canon needs to make the camera more expensive, despite having poured interesting new developments and research into making their movie modes more viable - Canon gets a significant marketing boost (i.e. the camera is more competitive; it would be a mistake to think that there would be no dent in Canon's market share if they had ignored video, and that's before considering they would have missed out on possibilities like Cinema EOS to enter or create new markets) and they benefit from users who use their DSLRs as video production cameras, although recently they indeed have been apparently working to please purists - video users first, with the new and ambitious 1D X spec, and also with the Cinema EOS line. I wouldn't look for them to delete the Live View button any time soon, and the dedication of the shutter button to taking still pictures in video modes on EOS DSLRs should likely persist, so a video on/off button may continue to persist on all their DSLRs. In the end, though, I'm not sure it's a big deal.

 

[RichST]

Hearing all the photogs complain about the upcoming DSLR / Video hybrid and not having a true, photo only 5D3; I can't help but think of the irony.

I'm pretty certain the Video DSLR is going to be a lower megapixel stills camera

So with the DSLR video hybrid, you will get a better photo camera and a better video camera, just not huge megapixel.

Yes, but it's pretty apparent by looking at the spec sheets and reading between the lines with what canon has been saying and it looks like it will be a modified 1DX sensor, the 4K video will be done in an 80% crop mode with corresponds with an APS-H sensor size. The 1Dx is the natural to use for the sensor since it already has enough speed built-in to the converters, all the wiring and data pipelines etc to handle the very fast data feed that would be coming off the sensor at 4k in video mode.