EF Mount Video Camera [CR1]

[Canon Rumors]

<div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;;width: 55px;" name="fb_share"><div id="fb-root"></div><script src="http://connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#appId=125029517579627&xfbml=1"></script><fb:like href="http://www.canonrumors.com/?p=6821" send="false" layout="box_count" width="55" show_faces="false" font="arial"></fb:like></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/?p=6821"></a></div>
<p><strong>Sooner than Later?

</strong>Received an email talking about an EF mount compatible video camera in testing. There are 2 prototypes making the rounds of higher up testers for Canon.</p>
<p>Announcement would be in mid 2012. It was suggested it could be another one of those “in development” announcements.</p>
<p>No word on resolution or specs.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>

 

[transpo1]

God, I hope it doesn't look like the picture in the post...Canon should take a page from the build quality of the 5DII and make it as rugged as their DSLRs- at least give it the build quality similar to a RED camera.

Mid-2012 is a long way away, but if it's 4k or more with EF lens compatibility I'd buy it...if I haven't already bought an Epic-S.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

The original Post indicates it is busted. There seems to be lots of dreamers making up things, the internet empowers those who live in a fantasy world.

 

[EYEONE]

Why didn't Canon do this 3 years ago?

 

[canon1969]

I'm with "eyeone"... they should be embarrassed that Sony beat them to this launch. Their cam & lens businesses are HUGE. IMO, this is a clear indication that management is "siloed" into parallel universes. What a shame! :-[

 

[Edwin Herdman]

I'll tell everybody why there has been no EF Mount Video Camera so far. Lean in closely...closer...

IT'S BECAUSE IT'S A DUMB IDEA!

Really now, who thought using EF lenses for video was a good idea? Most are terrible for video work in at least three different ways, possibly more. Even the primes. I'm not going over all the reasons why, but the Lens Rental guy did a couple great articles on this, and I added a comment with my own thoughts to his latest article.

Now, could Canon make EF mount lenses appropriate for video? I suppose so, but the way many ENG / handheld style video cameras do AF is a lot different from still cameras - contast AF versus phase detection. I would not be surprised if the resulting EF mount signal line design would be somehow handicapped for video use. A video-dedicted mount should be a better solution all around as I don't think the EF mount really supports body-based zooming, i.e. the rocker switch zoom control on hand- and shoulder-held video cameras. I am also not sure if the jerky aperture changes (i.e. changing aperture from two values may momentarily open up the aperture completely, and if I remember right it may close down further, too) of a stills camera are due to the body or the lens. If it is something in the lens then this is a further problem. Same for the issue of how precise those aperture steps may be - for video (at least movie quality) it seems desirable to be able to smoothly open and close the aperture.

The one very important plus, which nobody has missed, of going with EF mount is that the image circle is much better for larger sensors. But this is just about the only plus of that system.

There is of course the question of what these cameras are to be used for. For news channels they have camcorder type cameras; Canon already has a line of zoom lenses. For movie studio type work, Canon has apparently released their own PL Mount lenses (a prediction I got completely wrong in short order).

I think that the growing popularity of DSLRs for video projects means that yes, there is a market for something better with the EF mount. But if you're going to market something as having better ergonomics and functionality for video, it makes little sense to then handicap that with the expectation that EF mount lenses will be a good solution. That said, there are some SLR lenses that would be well suited to special effects on an EF mount camera, but only a handful would really be useful for video, and only the most unusual (i.e. macros, tilt-shift lenses) would really be worthwhile for pros, and only because they have no direct video equivalents.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

I'll tell everybody why there has been no EF Mount Video Camera so far. Lean in closely...closer...

IT'S BECAUSE IT'S A DUMB IDEA!

Edwin

You are so right. EF lenses are not video lenses, and can't be turned into video lenses. Its hard to believe that those who want them for video actually know what they would be getting into.

another example:

That slip clutch in the AF mechanism of the USM lenses means you can not use a focus puller to reliably focus. Once that clutch slips, all your focus marks will be wrong, and you will get useless footage.

Only by severely compromising and careful work-arounds can you use them for serious video.

 

[NormanBates]

you're right, noone in their right mind would use canon L glass to shoot, say, a scene for an academy-award-winning film, or an end-of-season episode for a big TV series, or...

I'll give you that the lack of hard stops is a problem, that a manual declicked iris ring would be better, and that breathing is not nice, if you concede that all this is minute in comparison with having a big sensor (as compared to the previous canon camcorders), that AF is useless for a big chunk of the digital film market, and that zooming while recording is for home videos and TV shows looking for a funky over-the-edge aesthetic

 

[derbrocks09]

A dumb idea?

Seriously?

Yeah maybe for a traditional ENG type of video camera. But a large sensor cinema type camera is another story. Hell just look and how crazy people went for the Birger mount on the RED before RED stopped the support. Every AF100 owner just about is craving the Birger mount because it will be a game changer. If canon makes this camera and builds a wireless follow focus like Birger is building it will sell like crazy!

Dumb idea? Cmon guys.

 

[Edwin Herdman]

you're right, noone in their right mind would use canon L glass to shoot, say, a scene for an academy-award-winning film, or an end-of-season episode for a big TV series, or...

That list is only a fraction of the EF lens lineup, and the problems Jonny Everyday Shooter would face in trying to use his "good" lenses like the 50mm f/1.4 (as a great example of a good lens gone bad for video) make it a strange proposition.

You'll also note that focus pulling is mentioned as a limiting factor...it can be done, sure, but I would have to say that getting rid of fly-by-wire lenses and offering fast contrast detect focus would make the situation even better.

To be sure, there are still some great L lenses out there for video - I own one, the TS-E 17mm f/4L.

Dumb idea? Cmon guys.

Ditto this, there's a lot more to a movie camera system than just a large sensor.

From the business perspective, Canon's interest in selling high-end equipment and PL lenses may outweigh their interest in servicing a high-quality Super 35 film-size sensor camera and lens market. Well, perhaps (hopefully) the market will force that to change (and certainly I'd expect video people, especially in syndicated television and advertising, to gravitate to whatever is cheaper than the traditional options).

 

[EYEONE]

I'll tell everybody why there has been no EF Mount Video Camera so far. Lean in closely...closer...

IT'S BECAUSE IT'S A DUMB IDEA!

I appreciate your subtle and friendly response.

And I can understand it it terms of zooms because of the varifocal issue. But I don't see why using primes wouldn't be a fine idea.

Plus, I don't remember saying it would be a good or bad idea. But Canon had something going with the video and a camcorder with the EF mount would sell. Which begs the question of why they didn't do it a long time ago.

 

[UncleFester]

Two things I've noticed that are way over done in video these days (and I'm not picking on you,Edwin. Just my observation), are tilt-shift and focus-pulling. Brings too much attention to the technique rather than the content. Kind of like the wandering, shakey hand-held stuff that was popularized in the '90s.

But, if that's an indicator of things to come, then there's a clear path for purist videographer.

 

[T2iShooter]

I'll tell everybody why there has been no EF Mount Video Camera so far. Lean in closely...closer...

IT'S BECAUSE IT'S A DUMB IDEA!

Edwin

You are so right. EF lenses are not video lenses, and can't be turned into video lenses. Its hard to believe that those who want them for video actually know what they would be getting into.

another example:

That slip clutch in the AF mechanism of the USM lenses means you can not use a focus puller to reliably focus. Once that clutch slips, all your focus marks will be wrong, and you will get useless footage.

Only by severely compromising and careful work-arounds can you use them for serious video.

Okay, tell that to people like Philip Bloom, who would probably be all over this camera. Not to mention Sony, who has made not one, but two e-mount video cameras, which (optically) are Way inferior to the Canon L's.

you're right, noone in their right mind would use canon L glass to shoot, say, a scene for an academy-award-winning film, or an end-of-season episode for a big TV series, or...

If memory serves correctly, I think that next season of House was filmed with the 5D, too

 

[Edwin Herdman]

Two things I've noticed that are way over done in video these days (and I'm not picking on you,Edwin. Just my observation), are tilt-shift and focus-pulling. Brings too much attention to the technique rather than the content. Kind of like the wandering, shakey hand-held stuff that was popularized in the '90s.

But, if that's an indicator of things to come, then there's a clear path for purist videographer.

If you mean those "fake minature" videos all over Youtube and Vimeo, I'm not a big fan. I'd rather tilt-shift be used subtly, but since I don't watch a lot of TV, I can't really touch base with how it's used or overused. For me the purpose of TS lenses is to get multiple things in focus at once, or to throw that plane of field off an axis parallel to the sensor...it's not really an effect that could be "overused" any more than you can say "those durn flower and sports photographers and their out of focus backgrounds." If nothing else it lets the set decorator stretch the budget a bit further since they don't have to worry quite so much about distracting backgrounds (in the case of focus pulling). I do agree though, the overdrawn sort of pulling focus to remind the audience that this guy in the foreground is no longer speaking is pretty silly looking sometimes. Not a big fan of depth of field effects in video games either.

Okay, tell that to people like Philip Bloom, who would probably be all over this camera. Not to mention Sony, who has made not one, but two e-mount video cameras, which (optically) are Way inferior to the Canon L's.

I mean Philip Bloom no disrespect, but he makes it look too easy to do this and gets free publicity in the meantime for making video with equipment that is still just "not there yet." Close though. Personally, I thought the go-to guy for Canon DSLR video was Vincent LaForet. Nitpicking: Ls are the type of lens, EF is the lens mount...

The E-Mount was designed from the beginning as a movie mount in addition to as a still lens mount. You're right, it's not 35mm full frame, but if it is indeed doing well in professional work that can at least partly be blamed on the small sensors used up to this point in a lot of video cameras. It also can be credited to the cameras actually having a made-for-video lenses available - the Alpha-mount lenses don't replace actual video lenses.

I suppose that's a good way to wrap up my concerns about any EF mount video camera: It must launch with some lenses that work for video. Having the regular EF mount photographic lenses available as extras would be a great benefit, so long as one doesn't rely on them.

E-mount also has something else going for it that the EF mount doesn't - Sony released it as an open standard (at least mostly) in April. While there are video lenses in EF mount (like the Zeiss CP.2 lenses and their zooms), the EF mount isn't wide open like that.

you're right, noone in their right mind would use canon L glass to shoot, say, a scene for an academy-award-winning film, or an end-of-season episode for a big TV series, or...

If memory serves correctly, I think that next season of House was filmed with the 5D, too

The first time I ever saw an episode of House I ended up watching about five in a row (they had a marathon going)...good show, they know what they're doing. But they also have a lot of people working on it to make it work out. As a replacement for PL mount lenses on the one hand, or news /event cameras on the other, it is more or less a kludge and requires more kludges to get working right - have you ever seen what Canon HD video DSLR rigs look like? I would be all in favor of them continuing to put out small cameras with video but the EF lens lineup barely covers some of the basics (as evidenced by the link above) and as the format stands today its major benefits are maneuverability and cost. The points generally go to the more traditional formats.

(Note to self...never write anything that is provocative fodder for out-of-context quoting ever again!)

 

[T2iShooter]

Yeah... I realized that my last post was pretty uninformative, so let me try this again.

The Canon L series (what I meant when I said "Canon L's) is obviously not the perfect line of lenses for video. The makers of cine-lenses have it best, but for DLSR users the Canon L series is the second best line there is for video (with the best being the Zeiss CP.2 line) Also, while the Sony e-mount was made for both video and stills, it is very underdeveloped, and consists of an 18-55 f/3.5-5.6, 16 f/2.8 pancake, 18-200 f/3.5-6.3, and now a 30 f/3.5 macro. None of these lenses (except maybe the new 30 macro) have amazing optical quality, and they all have terrible apertures (at least for my tastes). Now, if you put on the alpha-to-e mount adapter, than the optical quality is definitely better, but I believe the L equivalents are still sharper.

Also, many people have done some pretty amazing things with Canon DSLRs. House being a major one. There are quite a few people that make being a DP look easy (Phillip Bloom among them), I was just pointing out that Phillip Bloom is always ready to get his hands on a new piece of equipment, and (from what I've read) seemed to be wanting an EF-mount video camera for quite some time.

Fun (and random) fact: the founder/owner of RED owned a glasses company, but after a while got bored of it, sold the company for some ridiculous amount of money, and invested it in making cameras.

 

[gene_can_sing]

Edwin, for many people, EF mount lenses are a GREAT solution for indie / art type projects. Why? Let me tell you why. A PL mount lens made by say... Cooke, costs about 50K per lens. A daily rental fee for a set of PL mount lenses is very expensive by itself. It's nice to just own a set of EF lenses that allows you to shoot anytime without worry of renting or having the insurance required to rent.

There are a LOT of people who are making very cool videos just using EF lenses and Canon 7d and Panasonic GH2. Why? Because they don't let the equipment limit their imaginations.

Sure it would be great to use PL mount lenses or some type of alternative video lens that costs less. But PL lenses are too expensive and current video lenses have their own set of problems (like bad optical quality and slow aperture). Sure, there are breathing problems with the EFs and focus pulling could be easier, but many are just looking past that and making good work regardless.

You can hold your breath and wait for the perfect setup, but you'll be waiting a long time. Mean while, there will be many who embrace what they have to work with and will PASS you up in no time at all.

As for Canon releasing a interchangeable lens video camera in 2012, they are complete IDIOTS for taking that long. Canon is the slowest moving company and their management is inept and cannot seem to release anything anymore. They cannot release a new DSLR and they certainly cannot release a video camera. What is their problem? Their management is terrible. Canon is a company stuck in the past, and unfortunately, I'm stuck with them because of the lenses that I own.

If they release a new 5D or a large sensor, interchangeable lens video camera, I would be over joyed. But I don't think it will happen for a long time. Canon is a terrible company just out to milk their customers with old tech. They accidentally started the large sensor video revolution, only to let it slip away to Sony and Panasonic. Canon could have owned the market, but the management is inept and should be fired for letting the future slip away as they have.

 

[leGreve]

If they can do better than Sony who with the FS100 has managed to produce a real prosumer video cam with the form factor of a dsrl (or Hasselblad) then they have a chance... but here are the things they really need to be putting into this camera in order to have a small chance at winning terrain:

- 4:4:4 raw video out, preferably in both HDMI and SDI or atleast 4:2:2
- Atleast 2K
- bulid in ND filter
- the same light sensitivity as the FS100 or better ( it can literally see in the dark with minimal of noise )
- XLR input for mics.
- Form factor... really really think about this before you send it out.

The Sony FS100 will in some months time be able to take EF lenses through the aid of the Birger mount adapter system. You can already attach EF lenses to it with dumb adapters (no aperture control... but this is what var ND filters are for) and you can find additional adapters for all types of lenses even the good old ones.

IMO... Canon is too late here... just like they are with the D series. Most likely this will be something people dream about for a years time and then Sony and Pana are already ready with their next shining star, or wait... did I forget to mention Scarlet RED (good luck there Canon)?

I don't think they'll remain on top for much longer. To be honest that bugs me, since I've invested a lot in Canon gear. But the things I got can last a life time, so why bother buying more...

Fail Canon... fail.

 

[kode]

It's not that unlikely a product, even though an update to their XH or XL series of camcorders might be more likely.

The focus pulling problem could perhaps be solved by putting a focus ring customized for that on the video camera body somewhere and remote controlling it?

 

[NormanBates]

I subscribe everything gene_can_sing said up there
except unlike him I'm not heavily invested in the canon system: most of what I use is adapted vintage glass
which leads me to a big downsie of the PL mount: there's amazing glass for it, but the price is too high, and there's not much cheap glass that you can adapt to a PL mount (because of its long focal flange distance: 52mm, longer than that of leica R, nikon F, olympus OM, Y/C, M42, pentax K, and canon EF)

apart from this, and going back to the main topic: epic fail by canon, mid 2012 is 18 months too late; of course it could be an amazing camera and take the world over by storm, but really, couldn't they have offered a not-so-great big sensor camcorder in the meantime? considering how long it takes to develop a new sensor, maybe not, but probably only because they took ages to start the race, seen how both sony and panasonic beat them by over a year

 

[gene_can_sing]

http://philipbloom.net/2011/07/13/birger/

Read that article and it's really SAD. With the Berger mount, Canon's very own EF lenses will work BETTER on Panasonic video cameras when using the Berger mount. Why? Because with the Berger adapter, you can electronically do focus pulls with EF lenses, something you cannot do on Canon cameras with their very own lenses! WTF?!?!?!

Now that is how far behind Canon has fallen and how horrible the management is. When the lenses that your very own company makes, works better on competitor cameras, that is ultimate FAIL on Canon's part.

WTF is Canon's problem? Is there just a serious management problem going on? Canon is becoming / has become such a PATHETIC company. At least soon when I either buy a Sony or a Panny, my EF lenses will work better on their cameras.

That just sounds so strange and really sad. WAKE UP Canon. You guys are seriously blowing it.

All the lack of activity on the part of Canon (No new DSLR, no video pro video cameras) shows that they have completely abandoned the Pro Market. Sure they are the biggest seller of cameras in the world with the highest profits, but they are just pushing dated tech to Mothers and grandmothers.