Will Canon answer Sony's new cinema cameras

[Etienne]

Cameraman-interviewers don't use AF NOW because there isn't a good system available. Canon's DPAF can change that, and many one man bands are already touting the 70D, and C100, for this very reason. So, what was true yesterday, won't be true tomorrow, and some of it isn't even true today.

Careful now...it sounds like you're dangerously close to suggesting there's something innovative about Canon's newest CMOS sensors. You might get some flak for that wild idea...

LOL .... lots of flak ... manual focus is like the 11th commandment to video people. The DPAF technology is brilliant, and possibly revolutionary to video as they perfect it, and I am looking forward to seeing it full-sensor on upcoming Cx00 cameras.

 

[Etienne]

Cameraman-interviewers don't use AF NOW because there isn't a good system available. Canon's DPAF can change that, and many one man bands are already touting the 70D, and C100, for this very reason. So, what was true yesterday, won't be true tomorrow, and some of it isn't even true today.

Careful now...it sounds like you're dangerously close to suggesting there's something innovative about Canon's newest CMOS sensors. You might get some flak for that wild idea...

LOL .... lots of flak ... manual focus is like the 11th commandment to video people. The DPAF technology is brilliant, and possibly revolutionary to video as they perfect it, and I am looking forward to seeing it full-sensor on upcoming Cx00 cameras.

I think the day when automatic AF systems can be programmed ahead of time to focus either on certain subjects at certain times, or to certain points within the depth of field at certain times (or maybe just at the push of a button), then the 11th commandment will happily be broken by a lot of video people. I think the main reason why manual still reigns supreme is that for many use cases, you pre-determine where your going to be focusing during a shoot, and pull focus from point a to point b to point c smoothly and at the right times and right rate during a clip.

I think the big deal with DPAF is you could track focus in a subject moving front to back in the depth of field, which from what I've seen, is probably the more difficult job for a focus puller (or the camera operator, if they are pulling their own focus). I think if QPAF comes along at some point, that will be when the accuracy and consistency of such focus improves to the point where it could really be relied upon for critical video work.

Reviewers claim that the DPAF in the 70D doesn't hunt at all, and tracks fairly well. Combine that with touch screen to spot focus and it is extremely powerful, eliminating the human error. They need to provide really smooth pull, and variable focus speeds from slow to near-instant. Programmable timing isn't necessary because the camera operator can trigger that for planned shoots anyway. I think this is all coming sooner than later. Even magic lantern has programmable focus pull points, albeit a bit kludgey.

Tracking is another good use of the DPAF, but for me the biggest is just the fact that I can focus my attention on interviewing while the camera compensates for the subjects movements. I could even get three camera angles in focus while interviewing as a one-man-band, or a single cameraman can setup and monitor two cameras, especially with wifi control (sit at one camera, and operate the second remotely, including focus).

The more power, the better.

 

[Loswr]

DPAF and STM are for newbies and consumers that play around making videos, not professionals.

Yep, there are lots of newbies and consumers dropping $12,000 on a C300 to play around making videos.

 

[Etienne]

...
I know that DPAF locks onto subject well, but from what I'd seen, although people are impressed with the tracking, it isn't as good as what you get with a person actually pulling focus. There are often little blips where focus is just slightly out then it corrects, which IMO, isn't quite good enough for critical work. I'm sure it will improve...I'm curious to see if the 7D II's sensitivity improvements help that or not. I think moving from DPAF (which is basically just having horizontal detection) to something like QPAF, or another innovation that achieves the same thing (allowing horizontal and vertical detection) will improve tracking. Long term, someone will get to full double cross type technology, where phase detection can be performed in the horizontal, vertical, and both diagonal directions.
...

DPAF or QPAF doesn't work with those Zeis PL cinema lenses that are all manually focused.

As jrista has said, professionals behind cinema cameras don't use any sort of automated focus that is camera based and Canon knows this which is why all of its cinema lenses have focus gears on them.

DPAF and STM are for newbies and consumers that play around making videos, not professionals.

Let the flak fly.
Philip bloom , and others making full time income as film makers are either positive on dpaf, or are already using it. OMG and they didn't get your permission? You should revoke their credentials, oh all - knowing master and judge, and fine them for paying canon to install dpaf on their C100 cams. I'm sure they are not using the AF, but just felt like giving canon a few hundred bucks. And pros don't use punch in focus. So many disobedient pros in the world, it must just drive you "real" pros nuts.

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

Sony has been in the digital Cinema camcorder business for a long time, they created a company in conjunction with Panavision called CineAlta.

Canon is a relative newcomer in Cinema, but strong in broadcast equipment.

If you look at many of Sony's marketing materials for their broadcast cameras, you'll see them attached to Canon DIGISUPER box lenses (with the Canon logo masked, of course).

Certainly Canon lenses, Sony likely bought Minolta thinking to get some lens expertise. And everyone uses Fujinon broadcast lenses which are surpurb. I think Panavision has a pretty substantial hold on the Cinema lens market, but things do change over time.

And then, there is that company that some have never heard of with a 50% market share in Cinema projection lenses. Schneider-Kreuznach .

 

[Loswr]

And then, there is that company that some have never heard of with a 50% market share in Cinema projection lenses. Schneider-Kreuznach .

But I suppose quite a few people here are familiar with one of their subsidiaries – B+W filters.

 

[Etienne]

DPAF and STM are for newbies and consumers that play around making videos, not professionals.

Yep, there are lots of newbies and consumers dropping $12,000 on a C300 to play around making videos.

True, however how many of the actual professionals dropping $12,000 on a C300 are doing so to play around with DPAF, especially on critical shoots? I'd wager the percentage is quite small at this point. That may change, especially if/as the technology improves...but I would be willing to bet that manual follow focus rigs are still used with a majority of C300 shoots where focus is critical.

There are 1000's of pros making a living shooting docs and ENG work either alone or with one assistant. Not all video work is done on a set with a team of cameramen, focus pullers, audio guys, and cable runners and what not. There's a place for AF, and it's actually really easy to not use it if you don't want to; no one suggested that manual focus was a thing of the past, but AF is a tool that will become increasingly useful as time goes on. And I'm sure my blasphemy is making someone's eye's bleed right now.

 

[Loswr]

There are 1000's of pros making a living shooting docs and ENG work either alone or with one assistant. Not all video work is done on a set with a team of cameramen, focus pullers, audio guys, and cable runners and what not. There's a place for AF, and it's actually really easy to not use it if you don't want to; no one suggested that manual focus was a thing of the past, but AF is a tool that will become increasingly useful as time goes on. And I'm sure my blasphemy is making someone's eye's bleed right now.

How can that be? The Internet – font of knowledge for computer programmers, biological scientists, and others with no direct knowledge of the broadcast/cinema industry – says you're wrong.

 

[Loswr]

I just needed to balance Neuro's comment that implied that people are spending $12,000 on the C300 primarily to get DPAF. I don't think that's the case. I'm sure it's a useful feature people want, I just don't think that's THE reason people buy the C300.

My point wasn't that people are buying the C300 for DPAF, but that Canon – a company that spends millions on market research – decided to offer DPAF as a feature upgrade on a $12000 camera aimed at the professional market. That was in response to dilbert's comment that DPAF is for newbies and consumers playing around at making videos...I'm sure Canon knows a little bit more about their market than dilbert.

I suspect you 'needed' to counter my point as a way to compensate for being called on your gaffe regarding the financial data.

 

[Etienne]

DPAF and STM are for newbies and consumers that play around making videos, not professionals.

Yep, there are lots of newbies and consumers dropping $12,000 on a C300 to play around making videos.

True, however how many of the actual professionals dropping $12,000 on a C300 are doing so to play around with DPAF, especially on critical shoots? I'd wager the percentage is quite small at this point. That may change, especially if/as the technology improves...but I would be willing to bet that manual follow focus rigs are still used with a majority of C300 shoots where focus is critical.

There are 1000's of pros making a living shooting docs and ENG work either alone or with one assistant. Not all video work is done on a set with a team of cameramen, focus pullers, audio guys, and cable runners and what not. There's a place for AF, and it's actually really easy to not use it if you don't want to; no one suggested that manual focus was a thing of the past, but AF is a tool that will become increasingly useful as time goes on. And I'm sure my blasphemy is making someone's eye's bleed right now.

I haven't denied that autofocus is a useful tool. All I am saying is I think it's a bit preliminary to make any arguments that it's THE reason people are generally picking the Canon Cinema EOS system. I think it still has some issues with tracking, and I think there is a reason for that manual focusing is still a primary means of focusing (especially when getting it right is critical.) I don't think it will (or should) stay that way forever, and I think once other manufacturers start releasing video sensors with similar technology (it's coming, for sure) that we will see some rapid improvements in tracking capabilities.

Trust me, I'm the last guy to be against improving technology. I've spent weeks on these forums arguing that Canon needs to do MORE to improve their technology (particularly their sensors) more and faster. I just needed to balance Neuro's comment that implied that people are spending $12,000 on the C300 primarily to get DPAF. I don't think that's the case. I'm sure it's a useful feature people want, I just don't think that's THE reason people buy the C300.

I didn't think you were deadset against AF, like some other purists. And most certainly the C300 is a great camera even without AF. At the moment though, Canon's DPAF is the best available for video, and that's quite an achievement. But Sony's new PXW-FS7 seems poised to destroy C300 sales, if reviews live up to the specs and hype out there, DPAF or no DPAF. Performance is still unverified, and the Cx00 are a known entity delivering stellar low light performance, which might end up being the weak point of the FS7. Time will tell. I hope these developments push Canon into high gear, and urges them to accelerate their C100/C300 mk II development. I'm in favor of the C100 over C300, not just because of price, but size and weight as well. A smaller, lighter camera helps keep you agile, less conspicuous, and into tighter spots. ... all of which leads to greater chance to catch the moment.

 

[CarlMillerPhoto]

DPAF and STM are for newbies and consumers that play around making videos, not professionals.

Yep, there are lots of newbies and consumers dropping $12,000 on a C300 to play around making videos.

Lol. You yourself don't even believe those purchasing a C300 are doing so because of DPAF. Troll.

Edit
My mistake. I guess you're just bad at getting your point across:

My point wasn't that people are buying the C300 for DPAF, but that Canon...decided to offer DPAF as a feature upgrade on a $12000 camera aimed at the professional market.

 

[dgatwood]

Canon's XF Codec is already integrated into a lot of company's workflows. Very few channels broadcast 4k and it's very expensive to post in 4k.

That's why you acquire in 4K, post in 1080p, and keep the original 4K assets for future-proofing, much like many studios did with 16:9 content during the first part of the last decade, when most TV sets were still 4:3. Then, when you need 4K versions of the content, you import the EDLs, pull in the 4K assets instead, and bring in people to update the SFX for 4K, if necessary. By the time you actually need the 4K content, computers will be fast enough that much of the 4K post work won't be expensive anymore.

There's a market for 4k in the consumer sphere (youtube distribution), not so much in the professional sphere, that's all 1080p except at the ultra high end. This isn't a consumer device, it's a professional one, and thus it's build on reliability and integrating into conservative workflows, not specs or features alone.

Workflows, though, not acquisition. It's very shortsighted to do content acquisition in anything other than the highest quality format you can get your hands on. Downsampling during ingestion should be relatively easy. If it isn't, either hire a programmer or get better editing tools.

Look at how Arri is destroying Red in broadcast tv and in film... It's not because Arri has the better format (the Alexa does have a better image)... it's because it has an easier to handle, "lower end" codec in a lower resolution.

I'd imagine a big part of it is also reputation and familiarity. Red isn't even a decade old, whereas Arri has been doing cinema hardware for almost a hundred years. Folks know the name, and they're used to their gear.

I can do 4K natively on my Samsung Note 3, but not all 4Ks are equal, and 4K is not necessarily better than 1080p.

Fair enough. I didn't mean to imply that the 4K quality on a cell phone would even remotely approach that of a DSLR (or even necessarily be as good as 1080p on a DSLR). I just meant that if a cell phone has the CPU/GPU horsepower to produce 4K output, it's embarrassing for expensive DSLRs to not be able to handle it at all.

 

[CarlMillerPhoto]

I think they'll "answer" Sony on a tech/feature level, but not on a price-point level. I think Canon is okay letting go of the budget/indie filmmaker. I don't know the revenue that market brings in for them, but perhaps it's irrelevant. Maybe it's purely a branding decision (i.e. Canon doesn't want to be associated with the low-end video market). Maybe they're okay letting every student filmmaker, wedding videographer, and individual that's getting started in video go to other brands. Perhaps the same person in charge of video strategy also heads Canon's mirrorless strategy :

 

[Ebrahim Saadawi]

I think we all agree on this: the C100, C300 has been wonderful cameras for the past 3 years, in my experience the most well-designed AND the best HD image I've ever seen come out of a video camera, they are just truly remarkable when you actually use them and see the image. That's why the C300 became the de facto standard in HD broadcast, taking the Digibeta place in 2012-13-14. That specific camera is a true example of how sepcs are absolutely meaningless when evaluating a camera, everybody dismissed it immediately for the lack of specs yet it turned out to be workhorse you can trust and produce high quality images with, easily, this is what Canon is all about in both videography and photography fields. Look how many people are buying and using the C300 now compared to the Scarlet which was announced at the same time with remarkable specs that everybody predicted the failure of the C300.

BUT, that was alright and good for the past couple of years, now, Canon HAS to offer 4K resolution, high frame rate, and 10 bit aqcuisition path. They just have to offer these solutions in order to compete with the upcoming (current?) market. Even if people are not in need for those right now, they WANT them. Especially when investing in a camera for their business, they will surely want it to be future proof 4K ready, with HFR and 10bit, that's why I believe the C line will not be purchased in quantities anymore after the FS7 release, it's just not a smart investment to buy a 12K$ 1080p camera right now, even if you don't need it.

 

[Loswr]

DPAF and STM are for newbies and consumers that play around making videos, not professionals.

Yep, there are lots of newbies and consumers dropping $12,000 on a C300 to play around making videos.

Lol. You yourself don't even believe those purchasing a C300 are doing so because of DPAF. Troll.

Edit
My mistake. I guess you're just bad at getting your point across:

My point wasn't that people are buying the C300 for DPAF, but that Canon...decided to offer DPAF as a feature upgrade on a $12000 camera aimed at the professional market.

So...what is your point, exactly? That you need things spelled out explicitly because you can't grasp a simple inference, perhaps?

 

[Ebrahim Saadawi]

DPAF is being used by both professional videographers on the C300/100 when manual focus is prohibited and by hobbyiests/beginners when they don't have the skill to manually pull focus as well. It serves both very well. What's wrong with that? It's a brilliant technology.

 

[Etienne]

I think we all agree on this: the C100, C300 has been wonderful cameras for the past 3 years, in my experience the most well-designed AND the best HD image I've ever seen come out of a video camera, they are just truly remarkable when you actually use them and see the image. That's why the C300 became the de facto standard in HD broadcast, taking the Digibeta place in 2012-13-14. That specific camera is a true example of how sepcs are absolutely meaningless when evaluating a camera, everybody dismissed it immediately for the lack of specs yet it turned out to be workhorse you can trust and produce high quality images with, easily, this is what Canon is all about in both videography and photography fields. Look how many people are buying and using the C300 now compared to the Scarlet which was announced at the same time with remarkable specs that everybody predicted the failure of the C300.

BUT, that was alright and good for the past couple of years, now, Canon HAS to offer 4K resolution, high frame rate, and 10 bit aqcuisition path. They just have to offer these solutions in order to compete with the upcoming (current?) market. Even if people are not in need for those right now, they WANT them. Especially when investing in a camera for their business, they will surely want it to be future proof 4K ready, with HFR and 10bit, that's why I believe the C line will not be purchased in quantities anymore after the FS7 release, it's just not a smart investment to buy a 12K$ 1080p camera right now, even if you don't need it.

Pretty much agree with everything you've said, including DPAF comment above.
I am hoping Canon goes to town on the C100 mk II soon, I love it's compact size! But that FS7 looks very compelling and is going to be hard to beat from the looks of it.

 

[Woody]

To OP: I think you've got it wrong.

From http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-definitely-a-new-e-mount-4k-video-camera-to-be-announced-at-photokina/:

"Sony will be taking design cues from the success of the Canon Cinema series. Will replace FS100. E-mount. 4k. Competitively priced. These will be C100 and C300 killers!!"

Looks like it's Sony that is chasing after Canon, not the other way round. ;D

 

[Etienne]

To OP: I think you've got it wrong.

From http://www.sonyalpharumors.com/sr5-definitely-a-new-e-mount-4k-video-camera-to-be-announced-at-photokina/:

"Sony will be taking design cues from the success of the Canon Cinema series. Will replace FS100. E-mount. 4k. Competitively priced. These will be C100 and C300 killers!!"

Looks like it's Sony that is chasing after Canon, not the other way round. ;D

Let the war continue ... we get better cameras from both companies! With the PXW-FS7 on the way (the camera referenced in the link), it's now Canon's turn to step it up.

 

[LetTheRightLensIn]

Concerning the cinema line, I don't think will see a the C300 successor right now. Expect it in 2015, and of course it will have 4K and 10bit.

If you need 4K now, buy the FS7 and shoot with it, better than wondering why your C300 doesn't shoot 4K. If you don't need 4K right now, keep shooting beautiful 1080p with the C100/300 until their replacement is due sometime next year.

I think the Sony PXW-FS7 has caught a lot of people by surprise, including Canon, and they probably don't have anything ready to compete at that price point.

They could have, but instead of carrying on the surprise of their 5D2 and all full tilt they went into milk and follow mode. So now it's Sony and whoever else instead of them.

You're probably right, we won't see a new Cx00 camera for another year, maybe more. In the meantime this FS7 will be all alone in this class. Don't get me wrong, I am a Canon fan, and I became a fan because of the enormous bang-for-the-buck that Canon provided. But these latest Sony's are very compelling.

If the reviews bear out the specs, then the PXW-X70 will win over the Canon XF200 for me this year. And I was thinking C100 soon as well. Although it is a really nice camera, now it will be a matter of whether Canon introduces something that can compete with the FS7 in the next 6-10 months (provided that independent reviews confirm what the specs promise).

And it's in the DSLRs where they really had created the revolution, but instead they crippled them to save the mid-high end stuff, where, as predicted, Sony is now hittingback with a vengeance. So what did they cripple their low and mid-end stuff for?