No Finalized 5D Mark III Yet [CR2]

[UncleFester]

I'm one of those guys who has already left Canon for Panasonic and I know two friends who just left for the Sony FS100. Canon is about to lose huge if they don't produce a competitor to the AF100 and FS100 fast!

I have no facts to support, but my guess is the majortyof people leaving Canon were not terribly committed to begin with.

From photographer to big-time filmmaker because a dslr shoots video? Nah.

Are you referring to Vincent Laforet? Pulitzer Prize winning photojournalist who switched from still photography and moved from New york to Hollywood where he now does video full time? Of course, he now uses Canon DSLR's, Red, Sony, Arri, and others, but it was because of the 5D MK II that he made the switch, and has more business than his company can handle. The right tool for the job.

He is a photographer, and a camera is a tool, be it video or still, its the guy behind the lens who makes it all work.

Oooops! Well, that's certainly embarrassing.!

He's still a photographer though, isn't he...that was my original thought although poorly conveyed.

 

[leGreve]

All that aside, this thread is about the 5D Mark2 and its successor. Talking about the AF-100 and FS-100 is not at all relevant or helpful.

True in the sense that it will cut down sales of the 5D mkII when people realise that the video in it is seriously outdated. This thread is not only about the tech behind Canon, but also a guideline for people who are looking for alternatives since it would seem that Canon can't get their finger out their ass.

I'm here to tell you guys who are wanting to step up from the old fashioned tech that makes up the 5D... take the leap and go Pana or better yet Sony.

In regards to the price that is twice as high... that is true, but you are also getting atleast twice as much for the money. You get xlr, peaking, zebra, 4:2:2, all the good stuff, and the camera is basicly as easy to work with as turning it on.

Now... how does this tie into the debate on mkii and iii? It does because we shouldn't be celebrating Canon just because it's canonrumors, that is biased, uninformative and ignorant to do so. If something better comes along, the smart people move on (Look at Philip Bloom... and others), we don't hang around waiting for our dear Canon love to come up with something that can remotely compete with what is on the market at the moment.

The Philip Bloom blog says all that is needed to be said in regards what Canon needs to fill into a competing camera. Until they come up with this, do yourself and your paying clients a favor and upgrade instead of running around with toy canons in massive rigs and "nice try" software hacks.

Disclaimer: I own a 5D mk II and several Ls, but from now on I'll only pack it out when I need a B cam or doing stills.

 

[leGreve]

I'm one of those guys who has already left Canon for Panasonic and I know two friends who just left for the Sony FS100. Canon is about to lose huge if they don't produce a competitor to the AF100 and FS100 fast!

I have no facts to support, but my guess is the majortyof people leaving Canon were not terribly commited to begin with.

From photographer to big-time filmmaker because a dslr shoots video? Nah.

Are you referring to Vincent Laforet? Pulitzer Prize winning photojournalist who switched from still photography and moved from New york to Hollywood where he now does video full time? Of course, he now uses Canon DSLR's, Red, Sony, Arri, and others, but it was because of the 5D MK II that he made the switch, and has more business than his company can handle. The right tool for the job.

He is a photographer, and a camera is a tool, be it video or still, its the guy behind the lens who makes it all work.

Yes... but the guy behind the camera, would never chose a Canon over a Red or an Arri if it was available to him, atleast only for the fun of it.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Yes... but the guy behind the camera, would never chose a Canon over a Red or an Arri if it was available to him, atleast only for the fun of it.

Since he owns his own business, he choses the right equipment for the job, including Red and sony, and even some high end speciality stuff.

And, he is the guy behind the camera. It does not make good business sense to lease a $60, 000 Red Epic if a $5000 Canon will do the job. Customers tend to be very cost sensitive, and when we are talking a dozen cameras to do the job, a lower cost for the camera does let you under bid competitors who lease the very expensive stuff.

Here is his gear page, there is a lot of it!

http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/mygear/

 

[oldfilmdude]

The Canon still side opted to play in the field of video. As a result, the still side and the camcorder side better resolve the issues of campatibility. If not, I agree with the earlier post that there are those individuals that will just migrate over to the Sony NEX FS100. Both Canon groups need to come together on codec, interchangable lenses (between still bodies and camcorders), and offer a total solution to their customers. Coming from a film background (stills, 16/35mm movie film, and migrating to the early Sony Betacam) -- the lack of interchangable lenses between the different bodies have always been a "thorn in my side". Digital technology has changed everything -- there is no excuse why Canon cannot resolve these issues. Sony is moving towards getting it right -- Canon needs to respond quickly to stay competitive.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

I'm one of those guys who has already left Canon for Panasonic and I know two friends who just left for the Sony FS100. Canon is about to lose huge if they don't produce a competitor to the AF100 and FS100 fast!

Ok. You left Canon but you still read and comment on Internet forums for people that own and use Canon cameras. So you can't let Canon go. That's nice to know.

Furthermore, this thread is about the 5D Mark2 and its successor, not dedicated video cameras such as the AF100 and FS100. I'd suggest you start another thread somewhere else to discuss that.

It's worth noting that the FS-100 is more than twice the price of the 5D Mark2. The Panasonic AF100 is similarly much more expensive than the 5D Mark2. If people want to pay a whole lot more money for a video camera, so be it. Canon needs to fill out their product line in that area.

All that aside, this thread is about the 5D Mark2 and its successor. Talking about the AF-100 and FS-100 is not at all relevant or helpful.

How is it not relevant when nobody is buying Canon for this anymore at the numbers that they had been? You sound like a Canon employee with your head in the ground.

 

[Loswr]

How is it not relevant when nobody is buying Canon for this anymore at the numbers that they had been? You sound like a Canon employee with your head in the ground.

You sound like someone who believes everything they read on the Internet. Can you show me the sales figures to support your assertion that nobody is buying Canon dSLRs for video? By all accounts, the 5DII is still selling very well. Gene_can_sing obviously confirms this with his repeated pleas for everyone to stop buying the 5DII so Canon will release the 5DIII.

 

[oldfilmdude]

I am quite aware the post is in regards to the 5DII and its successor. I am not comparing the 5DII to the Sony, but rather stating compatability is a key issue when manufacturers are developing new products for their users. Give me one good reason (since shallow depth of field has now become a selling point) why the lenses for the 5D will not interchange with Canon's professional camcorders? It is like Canon making VHS tape for their still group and Beta tape for the camcorder group. I most likely will always use a dedicated still camera as well as a dedicated video camera. The marriage would just be better if the Canon groups would come together on interchangable lenses, codec, and provide a camcorder similiar to the Sony FS100.

 

[WarStreet]

The comparisons of the 5D Mark2 with FS-100 and AF-100 are quite silly. They're completely different types of cameras and you're comparing apples with oranges. If you want to compare the 5D Mark2's video with something else, find another DSLR...

I have no knowledge about video and went to read a bit about these video cameras, and although they are:

(1) Much more expensive than the 5DII
(2) Specialising in video instead still photography
(3) More modern

They still have a smaller sensor and that users still consider the 5DII as the king of DOF with good low light capabilities. Even although they are not comparable to each other, the cheap, old, photo camera 5DII, still has it's positive points.

It is also interesting to note that there is no other entry level FF dslr alternative with video capability.

Some video users mentioned that lenses are more important, and that it is important that video cameras to be compatible with EF-lenses. Gene says that he has a problem due to the EF canon lens collection he has.

Canon lead the FF dslr in the video department by nearly 3 years and still counting. Due to this, Canon achieved their main dslr goal, the sales of lenses !! And we have to consider that once the competition release an entry-level FF video dlsr, Canon will release the 5DIII within a short period hoping to maintain this advantage or at least satisfy enough the video users, with the intent to sell even more lenses.

 

[Loswr]

Due to this, Canon achieved their main dslr goal, the sales of lenses ...Canon will release the 5DIII within a short period hoping to maintain this advantage or at least satisfy enough the video users, with the intent to sell even more lenses.

This is supported by features included in Canon's newest and most expensive lenses that are targeted specifically towards video shooting.

 

[WarStreet]

This is supported by features included in Canon's newest and most expensive lenses that are targeted specifically towards video shooting.

Yes, I forgot about these lens features. It makes sense for Canon to satisfy the video users, since there are already a good number of them. I think they will continue to increase rapidly due to the pro services such as weddings to differentiate themselves from their competition, and also more hobbyist would like to pick up video too.

 

[oldfilmdude]

The 5DII has --and its successor will have -- great selling points in regards to both stills and video. That is not my debate. The big sensor for camcorders is here. Canon is behind in this respect. The Sony FS 100 super 35 is similiar to the 7d when it comes to crop factor. 5DII users are already taking Canon glass, with adapter, and using those lenses with the FS100. Sony has opened up the market for other lens groups to develop lenses for the FS100. If Canon will just catch up -- there should be nothing for me to further debate on this issue. 5DII great camera -- Its Successor should be even better -- Canon lenses are great -- Need a Canon Camcorder with larger sensor like 5DII. It is truly the individual behind the camera that controls how a final picture or scene will look. Just want to slap a lens on a 5DII successor, take that same lens put it on a Canon camcorder with similiar sensor and know that the shots can be controled the same in regards to equipment.

Those of us that have been in the business for many years started with film. You had a camera(s), a bunch of lenses, a light meter, a grey card, some filters, some black & white and color film, and then it was up to that person behind the camera that made those stunning pictures. No zoom lenses back then, no auto focus, no auto exposure -- just your knowledge of light, the choice of the lens and f-stop to ultimately give the effect you were looking for, make the exposure, develop the film, and then watch the magic happen when the final print appeared.

Technology has changed the world of picture taking. I think for the good. All I am saying is with the technology today Canon can make a larger sensor camcorder and the lenses from the 5DII and its successor should interchange with the camcorder. It is coming....but will everyone wait.....It sounds like from the posts Canon may lose an opportunity. Revenue is great....Revenue will be greater if Canon develops products that are more compatible between the still and video side.

Wheter you are shooting stills and/or video all the basic concepts are the same. I used to tell videographers that worked for me that had no film experience -- "Give me a great still photographer and I can easily make him a videographer." Today the gap is much closer because of technology. Each of you hang in there and I believe it will happen.

 

[WarStreet]

5DII great camera -- Its Successor should be even better -- Canon lenses are great -- Need a Canon Camcorder with larger sensor like 5DII.

Your request makes lots of sense. I also thought about the possibility of a video dedicated FF camera with EF-lenses, but I have some doubts about the cost.

The nice advantage of video in the 5DII, is that they are sharing the dslr technology. They have some added R&D cost, which are more than justified due to the tons of sales. Creating a dedicated video camera with a new specialised FF sensor for video which would see relatively a small number of sales, will push up the cost of the device. I think that's why the mentioned video cameras such as the FS100 has smaller sensor and they are expensive.

I don't know much about video cameras available, does Canon or Sony etc... already have a digital FF video camera, maybe used in the professional market ? Which 35mm cameras are used for movies and what's the price of such cameras ? As I said, I don't know much about this, but the cost could be the problem.

So maybe we can either have a dslr shared FF sensor not optimised for video but low cost, or a smaller video optimised sensor and higher priced such as the FS100. Maybe the best way is to have both, using the the FF dslr for DOF scenes and the dedicated video camera for scenes where the dslr video quality is weak. Does this make sense ? Or even better hoping for the video dedicated FF camera using the ef mount with a decent price. It would be nice to see such a device if it is feasible.

 

[oldfilmdude]

From a video side there are other cameras out there like Red and Sony's super 35 that are either FF or close to full frame. The issue is not the cost, or the technology, or even the current high-end Canon glass -- the issue becomes Canon's commitment to bridge the gap between their current still camera that incorporates video capabilities that does very well in producing a film look and a Camcorder that is rich in functionality (mechanics of the video camera body, XLR inputs, timecode, codec, and other features, etc.) and making them compatible. Again, I am sure they are headed that way. I have seen sample footage of the FS100 -- looks great. I have seen a Canon lens on the front of that camera. I may be one of those individuals that does the same. Additionally, I probably will have a couple 5D Mark II Successors, a bunch of top of the line Canon glass, buy an adapter for the FS100 and just go after it. I would just like Canon to get their 5D Successor out there and at the same time announce a new FF or Super 35 Camcorder that will use the more expensive Canon glass. That is all I want -- again, I probably will have a successor 5d and an FS100 before Canon makes this type of announcement.

 

[wellfedCanuck]

At the risk of sounding stupid- doesn't anyone's wish list include a *** chip for geo-tagging photos or wi-fi or 3G/4G for transferring files? With the latter, someone could be post-processing while the photog is still shooting. Or, you could call and locate your camera if it is lost or stolen.

 

[J. McCabe]

At the risk of sounding stupid- doesn't anyone's wish list include a *** chip for geo-tagging photos or wi-fi or 3G/4G for transferring files? With the latter, someone could be post-processing while the photog is still shooting. Or, you could call and locate your camera if it is lost or stolen.

Wi-fi or 3G/4G for transferring files is not on my wish list - I usually shoot photos away from my computer, and do the processing myself, so I could just as well use a card reader when I get home. Am I an exception ?

I would like ***. I've heard it consumes a lot of power from the battery, so it might make sense to produce a grip with built-in ***. If the price is right, I would buy one for my 5Dmk2

 

[WarStreet]

From a video side there are other cameras out there like Red and Sony's super 35 that are either FF or close to full frame. The issue is not the cost, or the technology...

I have re-checked, Sony's super 35 sensor size seems to be 23.6mm x 13.3 mm which is more APS-C like and makes a difference in cost compared to a 36mm. The RED EPIC is 30mm x 15mm and it is a modular system. I can't find out the sensor module cost alone, but to get a whole camera they are selling it $58,000. http://www.red.com/store/epic/product/epic-m Is this the bare minimum needed for the EPIC or you can get a working camera for less ?

Also, on the net there are news about a Scarlett FF35 module which seems to be a FF sensor costing $12,000 (sensor module alone). I can't find this info on the red website.

There are also other FF alternatives which costs over $100K but I can only find this info on forums and don't know the validity of all this.

I just would like to find out if what I have said in the previous post makes sense or not. i.e Would a video dedicated FF sensor, be expensive due to the dedicated R&D/production and low sales, compared to using a dslr FF sensor alternative but with the disadvantage that it is not optimised for video ?

Could someone who knows about this subject tell me about any current FF digital alternative, the bare minimum working camera prices, and any links from where they can be purchased ?

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Could someone who knows about this subject tell me about any current FF digital alternative, the bare minimum working camera prices, and any links from where they can be purchased ?

Canon 5D MK II. Its a FF that is used every day be very large numbers of film makers from News Reporters to Television programs to Commercials to Indie Film Makers, and even occasionally by large feature film makers.

Its not a Red, and, you can get a refurb straight from Canon for under $2000.

Just like the Red, for serious money making video, you will then need 10X the cost of the body in accessories, tripods, audio, editing software, the whole shooting match.

 

[WarStreet]

Canon 5D MK II. Its a FF that is used every day be very large numbers of film makers from News Reporters to Television programs to Commercials to Indie Film Makers, and even occasionally by large feature film makers.

Its not a Red, and, you can get a refurb straight from Canon for under $2000.

Just like the Red, for serious money making video, you will then need 10X the cost of the body in accessories, tripods, audio, editing software, the whole shooting match.

Thanks, but I think you misinterpreted my request. Please re-read my last 2 posts as maybe you can give me the answers. I don't want to buy one, and don't do video, and I know about the value of the 5DII. The question I asked is just to find out what's the cheapest video dedicated FF cameras, to see the price difference of producing a video dedicated FF sensor vs a consumer still camera sensor with video capability.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

what's the cheapest video dedicated FF cameras, to see the price difference of producing a video dedicated FF sensor vs a consumer still camera sensor with video capability.

I don't think there is such a thing as a video dedicated FF sensor. A sensor that can be used for video can be used for stills