Did Canon launch the 1D C too early?

[expatinasia]

When you look at the specs of the Nikon D5 (which frankly have not impressed me that much) I cannot help but wonder whether Canon launched the 4K-capable 1D C too early.

I mean the 1D C has been out a few years and at a time when nobody was really taking 4K all that seriously (some still don't), and 8K definitely was not being discussed, but today everyone expects 4K in new cameras and we are talking about 8K more and more.

In some ways the 1D C has better specs than the D5 - especially when you consider the D5 has a mind-boggling 3-minute limit to its internal 4k recording.

Sure you can record to external (let's not have that discussion), and the 1D C was also over US$ 12,000 when it came out but is now around US$ 6,000 or US$ 7,000 (all those prices from fuzzy memory), but it is basically a 1D X (so best sports shooter out there) that's also 4k-capable.

At lot of us complain about Canon being slow to do this and that, and maybe they are in some areas (Sony's RX100 Mark IV/Panasonic's Lumix DMC-TZ100 come to mind), but was the 1D C just Canon being far too ahead of the game?

What do you think?

 

[sanj]

Don't think so. 4k was already in full swing in my area of work and from the moment I bought 1dc it has been renting out. So much so that it has made me so much money that I sold off by 1dx which had become redundant. I have shot considerable video with 1dc as second camera on several feature shoots.

 

[9VIII]

The problem is that they launched the 1DC at all.
Paying $6,000 for a firmware update is obscene.

 

[expatinasia]

Don't think so. 4k was already in full swing in my area of work and from the moment I bought 1dc it has been renting out. So much so that it has made me so much money that I sold off by 1dx which had become redundant. I have shot considerable video with 1dc as second camera on several feature shoots.

sanj, I think you are a bit of a visionary in that regard. How would you like to see the 4K performance you now have in the 1DC differ/improved/upgraded in the 1DX II?

The problem is that they launched the 1DC at all.
Paying $6,000 for a firmware update is obscene.

True, paying US$ 6,000 more for the 1D C over the 1DX was a big call.

Having said that, here we are all in early 2016 awaiting Canon's announcement of the 1DX II which will in all reality be almost the same as the 1DC but with better FPS, tracking, and tweaks to all the other things which have made the 1DX so great. And most likely for around US$ 6,499 or US$ 6,999.

I do think they were ahead of their time when they launched the 1DC.

Thankfully I do prefer the name 1DX II when compared to 1DC II, so that's good start already!

 

[ajfotofilmagem]

Viewed in this perspective, 1DC really was in a unique category when it was launched. Few people considered attractive at the time, due to much higher prices than the 1DX.

During those years people complained about the "absence" of options to record 4K DSLR, but Canon really offered a consistent solution, although pricey.

 

[tcmatthews]

No I would say it was late. The video man at work already had a Sony 4k video camera and worked out his workflow before the 1D C had came out. Most of his current Documentary style work is shot on a GH4. He may be a little odd that he does not want razor thin DOF full frame look. He would rather have Super35.

So no it was late and expensive.

 

[scyrene]

No I would say it was late. The video man at work already had a Sony 4k video camera and worked out his workflow before the 1D C had came out. Most of his current Documentary style work is shot on a GH4. He may be a little odd that he does not want razor thin DOF full frame look. He would rather have Super35.

So no it was late and expensive.

I'm confused. The 1DC came out 2 years before the GH4. Which Sony camera had 4K before then? Not their stills cameras - A7s and A7RII are both more recent. A video camera then? Fair enough, but that's a different category.

 

[nicksotgiu]

Couldn't agree more with this topic...

I feel like the 1D C was kind of an experiment when it came out.
It should've been Canon's 'flagship' DSLR for video, but it basically was a 1D X that shoots 4K and has C-log.

I have to say I'm excited to see what we're gonna get this year.
Canon must have felt the fire under their feet from the competition.

 

[bsbeamer]

I do not think it was launched too early. If I recall correctly, it was 5-6 years after the first RED 4K camera. Initially the 1DC was priced out of the reach of those who really wanted to try and use it for their work, especially when considering workflow and "bang for buck" approach. I know many people who simply said for that kind of money, I'm getting a RED system.

I actually think the pricing is what hurt them more than anything. Had it been more "affordable" out of the gate, I do not know if we would have had such a race to the bottom price war between competing manufacturers. They saw an opportunity in the market and tried to take advantage. Many of them have.

Also consider the 1DC was basically a software/firmware "unlock" that cost $5K+. That does not sit well with the people who buy these cameras (especially at that time). Today the idea of paying for firmware is not so terribly perceived, but at that price point I do think there would be severe negative implications - much like the Sony headaches with F5 and F55.

Then mix in the Magic Lantern community...

At the end of the day, people at that time wanted a killer cinema style camera (full frame or super 35) for $7,500-$10,000 (or less). That was the expectation and the competition was able to (sort of) deliver that.

If someone were selling a new 1DC camera today for $3500-$4000 I think the market would respond. But at $8000 new, there are just much better options out there. Unfortunately, they are not native/perfect EF mount options...

 

[tcmatthews]

I do not think it was launched too early. If I recall correctly, it was 5-6 years after the first RED 4K camera. Initially the 1DC was priced out of the reach of those who really wanted to try and use it for their work, especially when considering workflow and "bang for buck" approach. I know many people who simply said for that kind of money, I'm getting a RED system.

I actually think the pricing is what hurt them more than anything. Had it been more "affordable" out of the gate, I do not know if we would have had such a race to the bottom price war between competing manufacturers. They saw an opportunity in the market and tried to take advantage. Many of them have.

Also consider the 1DC was basically a software/firmware "unlock" that cost $5K+. That does not sit well with the people who buy these cameras (especially at that time). Today the idea of paying for firmware is not so terribly perceived, but at that price point I do think there would be severe negative implications - much like the Sony headaches with F5 and F55.

Then mix in the Magic Lantern community...

At the end of the day, people at that time wanted a killer cinema style camera (full frame or super 35) for $7,500-$10,000 (or less). That was the expectation and the competition was able to (sort of) deliver that.

If someone were selling a new 1DC camera today for $3500-$4000 I think the market would respond. But at $8000 new, there are just much better options out there. Unfortunately, they are not native/perfect EF mount options...

I am sure the video guy did say for that kind of money I would get a RED. Price defiantly hurt sells.

 

[sanj]

Don't think so. 4k was already in full swing in my area of work and from the moment I bought 1dc it has been renting out. So much so that it has made me so much money that I sold off by 1dx which had become redundant. I have shot considerable video with 1dc as second camera on several feature shoots.

sanj, I think you are a bit of a visionary in that regard. How would you like to see the 4K performance you now have in the 1DC differ/improved/upgraded in the 1DX II?

The problem is that they launched the 1DC at all.
Paying $6,000 for a firmware update is obscene.

True, paying US$ 6,000 more for the 1D C over the 1DX was a big call.

Having said that, here we are all in early 2016 awaiting Canon's announcement of the 1DX II which will in all reality be almost the same as the 1DC but with better FPS, tracking, and tweaks to all the other things which have made the 1DX so great. And most likely for around US$ 6,499 or US$ 6,999.

I do think they were ahead of their time when they launched the 1DC.

Thankfully I do prefer the name 1DX II when compared to 1DC II, so that's good start already!

I would prefer better bit rate - color depth.