Video Capabilities Will Be at the Heart of All Future Canon Prosumer Camera Bodies [CR2]
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
They might be trying to adapt to sony. When it was Canon vs Nikon, Nikon was winning the spec battle but not winning the camera war. It feels like sony does care which body you buy from them, as long as you are buying sony. The difference between the a7iii and the a9 is small compared when you think of Canon and nikon. The difference between the 6Dii and 1dxii is huge.
Upvote
0
rjbray01 said:
Any evidence for that, or is it pure supposition?
rjbray01 said:
Has it occurred to you they might not implement certain features because either they can't infringe other companies' patents, or because they think it can be done better in a different way? It's well established that Canon thinks in-lens IS is better for many purposes. PS which company's cameras have a reputation fo overheating? Deserved or not, it ain't Canon.
rjbray01 said:
A lot of people - and I would argue professionals especially - want gear that works, reliably, in a range of conditions. Canon is as good as anyone at providing that, and better than most.
Upvote
0
I think that goes without saying. At least some percentage of the market will want video capability. This drives the hardware design in ways still photography does not (especially thermal and data management). It would be a waste of resources to design a stills-centric camera when they can piggyback off the video infrastructure.Canon Rumors said:
Upvote
0
Etienne said:
Canon thought we'd all hate video on a dslr, I guess.
Also, speaking of the 5d2, I remember around the time it was being announced there was so much praise and hype for it. 99% sure that one part of the marketing mix was an episode of the TV series House, where they filmed a good portion on 5d2. How did that not encourage them to double down hard and fast?
Upvote
0
NeverPlayMonopoly said:
They did. It's called the Cinema EOS line.
While everyone is chasing Panasonic doing all sorts of fun video things with consumer grade multi-purpose tech, Canon is selling far far far more lucrative items much higher up the feeding chain. Can you blame them?
- A
Upvote
0
ashmadux
Art Director, Visual Artist, Freelance Photography
This post makes me furious as a Canon customer. 
So basically, this modern dinosaur of a camera maker was content to hold on off on a multitude of features/upgrades, but now has reconsidered because sony is making them look lethargic?
UTTERLY RIDICULOUS and insulting to it's customer base. Making the best cameras should be their priority, PERIOD.
This headline alone should be a wake up call to us canon lovers - as two companies which we rely on for our image making (Canon+adobe) have gotten fat, stupid and lazy. Its just beyond ridiculous at this point. Our cameras are starting to resemble ATM machines compared to the UI & OS abilities of phone chips. That's just 'Trump SAD'.
PS ** Right now is the best time to start diversifying or workflows and hardware. Relying on these dopey organizations exclusively is bound to screw us over.
Friggin Canon
So basically, this modern dinosaur of a camera maker was content to hold on off on a multitude of features/upgrades, but now has reconsidered because sony is making them look lethargic?
UTTERLY RIDICULOUS and insulting to it's customer base. Making the best cameras should be their priority, PERIOD.
This headline alone should be a wake up call to us canon lovers - as two companies which we rely on for our image making (Canon+adobe) have gotten fat, stupid and lazy. Its just beyond ridiculous at this point. Our cameras are starting to resemble ATM machines compared to the UI & OS abilities of phone chips. That's just 'Trump SAD'.
PS ** Right now is the best time to start diversifying or workflows and hardware. Relying on these dopey organizations exclusively is bound to screw us over.
Friggin Canon
Upvote
0
ashmadux said:
Nice sentiment but a bit naive. All camera manufacturers exist to make profits as best they can.
Note the OP refers to “perceived” feature sets. While most of canon’s cameras are not spec sheet warriors, in many ways they outperform the competition. I prefer a solid camera to one which is just a hodgepodge of features, so I hope this rumor doesn’t portend a change in canon’s development processes from a thorough balanced design to a pursuit of paper tigers.
Upvote
0
I suppose that Canon assumed that since a very small percentage of ILC camera buyers actually use them to shoot video that video specs didn’t matter. Apparently they’re reconsidering. I expect that even infrequent video shooters harbor some video aspirations and don’t like being short changed.
The video features available in Canons better DSLRs today should really only be viewed as a hands on demo unit for their Cinema line. It becomes obvious very quickly when you use them for video production that they are intentionally designed to make day to day production use as difficult as possible. I give them a pass on MJPEG and assume that is an inconvenient but necessary evil but why is the 1080p so soft? Seems like good 1080p should be a given in 2018 and I think my stock 5D3 shot better 1080p than either the 5D4 or 1DX2.
The 1DX2, with its excellent read speeds, on board processing, throughout and thermal dispersion could be a much better tool than it’s allowed to be. Full sensor 4K 30p would be a nice start. That should be well within it’s capabilities. Don’t even get me started on log. I can’t use log on the 5D4 and then cut in 1DX2 footage without causing a grading nightmare. The list of intentionally downgraded features is long and well documented so I won’t rehash them all here
As things stand right now I’ll probably be looking elsewhere for my next video cam. I’m sure the c200 is nice but it sounds like Canon plays the same games with those. No broadcast codec. Only internal RAW yada yada yada. It’s all getting very old IMO.
The video features available in Canons better DSLRs today should really only be viewed as a hands on demo unit for their Cinema line. It becomes obvious very quickly when you use them for video production that they are intentionally designed to make day to day production use as difficult as possible. I give them a pass on MJPEG and assume that is an inconvenient but necessary evil but why is the 1080p so soft? Seems like good 1080p should be a given in 2018 and I think my stock 5D3 shot better 1080p than either the 5D4 or 1DX2.
The 1DX2, with its excellent read speeds, on board processing, throughout and thermal dispersion could be a much better tool than it’s allowed to be. Full sensor 4K 30p would be a nice start. That should be well within it’s capabilities. Don’t even get me started on log. I can’t use log on the 5D4 and then cut in 1DX2 footage without causing a grading nightmare. The list of intentionally downgraded features is long and well documented so I won’t rehash them all here
As things stand right now I’ll probably be looking elsewhere for my next video cam. I’m sure the c200 is nice but it sounds like Canon plays the same games with those. No broadcast codec. Only internal RAW yada yada yada. It’s all getting very old IMO.
Upvote
0
But don't worry all you Debbie Downers, (Canon Clowners?) even if Canon does eventually win the spec sheet wars by replacing the mirrorbox with a popcorn popper, you will always have DR to complain about. ;D
Upvote
0
"That said, we don’t think Canon has anything currently we’d consider prosumer in the mirrorless space, as much as I like the EOS M5 and EOS M50. Feel free to disagree on the latter"
What would the M5 need to have to make it be "ProSumer"? I have never thought much about that. I have both a 5DIII and an M5 and I use the M5 a lot for travel (which I have been doing a lot). I actually wish the thing was a bit bigger so I could work the controls a bit easier like I can with the DSLR's.
What would the M5 need to have to make it be "ProSumer"? I have never thought much about that. I have both a 5DIII and an M5 and I use the M5 a lot for travel (which I have been doing a lot). I actually wish the thing was a bit bigger so I could work the controls a bit easier like I can with the DSLR's.
Upvote
0
3kramd5 said:David Hull said:
A little extra volume so the controls would bit easier to operate, like their DSLR's.
Yep I agree there. The M5 seems to have everything there but it's size makes it a bit hard to work particularly if you adapt on a standard sized EOS lens. It sure makes a nice travel kit, though, I have it, a flash a couple lenses in a little ThinkTank sling bag and that kit bag it is a lot lighter than the 5D III kit bag.
Upvote
0
NeverPlayMonopoly said:
The final House episode of the season around that time was shot entirely on 5D2 cameras. The hype that started it was a short film "Reverie" shot by Vincent Laforet. Canon gave him a camera before it's release and told him to see what he could do. That short film set the indie video world on fire.
Upvote
0
Graphic.Artifacts said:
Absolutely true, it is getting very old. 10 years ago owners of other brands looked upon Canon users with envy. Not today. Canon played their "safe" game holding back for a decade, but the cracks, grey hair and creaky bones can't be ignored. I don't think they can afford to do that anymore.
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 378875
Guest
scyrene said:
Err ... fact !
On release of the 5Div Canon did an interview and blamed their half-baked 4K implementation on the fact that their engineers were unable to overcome heat problems ... problems which other manufacturers clearly overcame a long time ago.
And if Canon are being pipped prevented from delivering engineering solutions because other company engineers are coming up with patented inventions first then again this doesn't reflect well on Canon.
So overall it looks to me like Canon are struggling from an engineering perspective ... and its just blind or naive optimism that their delivery of 2nd rate products is a bizarre but winning commercial strategy ...
Upvote
0
rjbray01 said:
So, Canon has accidentally stumbled on a winning strategy. If that works for you, cool. My take is that dual pixel has been Canon's leading technology for mirrorless and video, and they have been willing to accept the delays in getting serious mirrorless and video to market to wait on it. Now that dual pixel is in place, the next question is whether they will come up with the processing power to rock and roll. Maybe they will or maybe they won't, but we shall see. Don't see any point in guessing.
Upvote
0
D
Deleted member 378875
Guest
BillB said:
No, I don't think there is any accident to Canon's winning strategy. It was achieved though both engineering prowess and commercial nouse.
Great products don't come about by accident : they are the result of years of investment in R&D more often than stumbling across solutions.
Whilst I totally "get" the economics of stratification of the market, and that car companies for example don't fit all their top technology into every model, generally large corporations try to "cover" the market.
In this case Canon have found themselves with a huge gaping gap for some considerable period of time ... which doesn't add up commercially.
The dual pixel technology has no doubt served them well ... I have owned an 80D since it was first released and been delighted with it.
But that was a long time ago in terms of product innovation.
What I am suggesting is that a lack of engineering prowess in R&D which started a long time ago is now coming to bear.
Whilst we know that Magic Lantern have been able to eek-out extra features which Canon have decided to withhold for commercial reasons, there are other features which seem distinctly lacking.
Whilst its easy to argue Lens Stabilization over In Body stabilization in the DSLR world as the former has benefits in stabilizing the viewfinder image, the latter has greater benefits in the mirrorless world : not least of which in that it allows lenses to be simpler and hence cheaper and to achieve the sort of resolutions we are seeing from the Sigma Art primes.
My logic goes like this ... Canon had to fit IS to their recent EF 85mm f/1.4 prime because they had no IBIS. To sell at a decent profit margin they had to compromise image quality. Had they been able to dispense with the IS requirement then this might have allowed them to focus both their R&D and manufacturing costs exclusively on the IQ.
Selling cameras without IS may have a short-term gain of locking customers into buying Canon's lenses with IS, but in the long term we have seen what happens to companies who try to lock in their customer base : think IBM PC or Wang word processors ... few anti-competitive behaviours last forever, but make way for more open-minded competitors to enter the market (Compaq, Dell etc ..)
I find it extremely difficult to believe that Canon are deliberately manufacturing their best L primes to a lower standard than they are capable of for a given price point .. if they had IBIS then they could probably compete more effectively with Sigma et al
As you say, they may well have goodies in the pipeline. Or maybe not.
By the way, I've forgotten, is it still OK to speculate on CR or is this rumors site actually for hard facts only ?
Upvote
0
Graphic.Artifacts said:
there's no real evidence that they are changing anything other than what they have been planning all along.
Until DIGIC 8 there was no possibility for video improvements in the DSLR's, now that DIGIC 8 opens the door to 4k h.264, Canon can do things they couldn't before.
It certainly doesn't mean that the world as changed and the few people that yell and scream about video in a DSLR are still anything other than a minor percentage point.
DIGIC 8 and faster possibly stacked sensors from Canon will bring a very quick change to the Canon landscape for cameras IMO that couldn't happen until now, from a Canon's perspective.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
