There is another RF mount camera coming in 2020 [CR2]

[addola]

Are you talking about this camera? https://ymcinema.com/2019/09/03/can...s-were-used-to-shoot-stand-by-you-short-film/
https://www.cinema5d.com/canon-8k-cinema-camera-first-official-footage/

It's probably the same one. When they showcased the Mac Pro ability to edit 8K video, they used an unreleased 8K Canon cinema camera. https://www.dpreview.com/news/68806...amera-to-show-off-its-mac-pro-pro-display-xdr

 

[stevelee]

Leaving the video out won't save a dime.

Might cost a little extra, since there will be the expenses of dual inventory.

 

[PureClassA]

As previously rumored back in April, and mentioned again here, Cinema line or video specific camera with RF mount would be pretty cool. We just saw the Sony a7s3 drop at $4000. And I keep seeing a lot of unfair comparisons to the R5 and R6 which are truly HYBRID cameras unlike the a7s3 which Sony obviously designs expressly with video in mind for a small MILC body. I've never seen anyone say they are buying an a7s to shoot stills, and if they are even using to do any stills, it's few and far between. So Sony can build a video MILC to do all the frame rates without much if any overheating issues internally, because unlike both the R5 and R6, the a7s is NOT over sampling anything. Think about the EOS R or the older 1DX2. The camera crop into 1:1 pixel readouts at 8.8MP for 4K. The a7s has a sensor built to do this natively, which is perfect for video, but lacking hugely by comparison for stills.

I have wanted to see Canon do this for years. But if we get an RF mounted Cinema C100-200 body with IBIS, that would be awesome too! But an R5 type body with a 12MP sensor and Digic X... well there would be most likely no overheating issues even at 4K120. But I'm probably hoping for too much lol

 

[StoicalEtcher]

The shit people write on there, you would think it was all just preteens.

Are you so sure it isn't??

 

[StoicalEtcher]

Leaving the video out won't save a dime.

I'd tend to come from the same starting point - video specs in a camera don't need to add that much cost (if anything) to retail price, especially once you take into account the benefits of additional sale volumes.

But, if there were to be a hypothetical R3, with 90mp, then we might start to conjecture that leaving out or down-grading some video specs may mean there are less overheating issues, which need additional hardware (or design) to combat the problems (real or marketing) that the R5 is now encountering.

I've no doubt that having video, and 8K at that, will be boosting R5 sales and thus lowering unit costs to us consumers, but what's the bets that someone at Canon Product HQ is wondering whether if there is to be a higher res. sensor in the R3, they might just save a lot of extra hassle or work-arounds in down-grading the accompanying video specs??

Just some thoughts...

 

[WhatDoesMStandsFor]

Why? Not that hard to fit two XLR, and having them mini will just add unnecessary bulk for a lot of people needing to adapt, and its going to be really annoying to mount for example a lav like Sennheiser AVX.. I don’t think it should be as small as a Red Komodo or Z-cam, but rather a practical camera to work with right out of the box, instead of rigging it since it’s probably not going to be a specs monster.

Because I want it to be smaller. Full size XLR are great for compability, but they'll make the camera bigger - maybe the same size, like a tiny smaller than the C100 Mk II. And I don't want to deal with an adapter such as the MA400 which came with the XC15 (that I've owned and after a while I've just gave up on using it).

If Canon decides to put full size XLR on the camera and make it bigger, that's a deal breaker for me. I'm already investing in a C300 Mk III (will be purchasing next week, can't wait) and I'll want a really smaller camera than the C100 Mk II. If this camera is not the one, I'll probably get a Komodo or just stick with my Pocket 6K (although I hate to deal with its ergonomics)

 

[Twinix]

Because I want it to be smaller. Full size XLR are great for compability, but they'll make the camera bigger - maybe the same size, like a tiny smaller than the C100 Mk II. And I don't want to deal with an adapter such as the MA400 which came with the XC15 (that I've owned and after a while I've just gave up on using it).

If Canon decides to put full size XLR on the camera and make it bigger, that's a deal breaker for me. I'm already investing in a C300 Mk III (will be purchasing next week, can't wait) and I'll want a really smaller camera than the C100 Mk II. If this camera is not the one, I'll probably get a Komodo or just stick with my Pocket 6K (although I hate to deal with its ergonomics)

But what are you going to plug in to the mini xlr? Røde Stereo videomic x? Only plug in xlr when the camera is on a tripod? Basically, do you want a Canon version of the Z cam or Red Komodo? I get that we want different cameras I’m just wondering how you are going to use it, both as a smaller and bigger camera?

 

[WhatDoesMStandsFor]

But what are you going to plug in to the mini xlr? Røde Stereo videomic x? Only plug in xlr when the camera is on a tripod? Basically, do you want a Canon version of the Z cam or Red Komodo? I get that we want different cameras I’m just wondering how you are going to use it, both as a smaller and bigger camera?

I'm going to use it as a B cam for the C300 Mk III (which should arrive today, actually. I'm excited!)