Description image

Canon May 'Bring the Might of Its Legal Team' if You Modify 1D X or 1D C Firmware

01.9.13 @ 1:12PM Tags : , , , , , , , , ,

That sounds promising for a potential firmware hack, right? We discussed not too long ago that the Canon 1D X and the Canon 1D C were not exactly the same camera, but that the 1D C had some internal hardware changes — at the very least a new heatsink, and probably some additions to the firmware to allow 4K recording. At the moment it’s still not clear how much the two cameras share in common, but with a quote like above, there is no doubt that the 1D X is probably capable of a lot more internally than the company is allowing at the moment. Whether or not your camera will explode when enabling those features is another consideration entirely, but we’re starting to get more details about these internals.

Here is what Canon Rumors had to say about the situation:


We had a chance to peer inside the EOS-1D C (No photos allowed) to find out how much it differed from the EOS-1D X. The differences are minimal, the biggest change is the heat sink inside the camera to keep the sensor circuitry cool during 4K video operation.

The EOS-1D X has some traces of the EOS-1D C firmware code and the features are locked. We don’t know how much of the firmware is the same.

I was told by someone at Canon that they would “bring the might of its legal team” to anyone that attempts to modify at the software level, the features of an EOS-1 camera body. So I think the firmware community out there today will probably leave the EOS-1D X alone.

Obviously that quote is coming from behind the scenes and not from a source we can cite, so while it certainly may have been said, it is tough to say whether that is the company’s official stance at the moment (considering they haven’t said much publicly about the firmware of their cameras being hacked).

The big reason that people might want to mess with the firmware of the Canon 1D X is because at the moment, that camera only costs $6,800 vs. $12,000 for the 1D C. A $5,000 difference would be a hefty savings for people who wanted the 4K functionality of the 1D C, while still retaining all of the other great features of the 1D X. The other possible changes that could happen in firmware could be related to the HDMI output of the 1D X, which, to my knowledge, cannot be recorded cleanly without cropping (if at all). Another slight difference between the two cameras is a missing headphone port on the 1D X.

Canon is probably trying to save a few dollars on R&D by producing almost the same camera twice for two different markets, but charging much more for the other one (which is a common practice by most companies). We can’t say which internal hardware parts are different yet other than the added heatsink, because a proper teardown has not been conducted of both simultaneously. Even if we did find out that they are mostly identical hardware-wise, going by the above information, there could be serious consequences for providing such a hack.

At this time, the folks over at Magic Lantern have not tried to modify the firmware of any of these 1D cameras, so we’ll just have to wait and see how this shakes out, and if any other adventurous hackers want to take up the reigns for these specific cameras — and possibly risk some lawsuits from Canon. We do have to take the company stance with a grain of salt at the moment, but I’ve never heard anything like that before related to the firmware hacking on their cameras. We’ll see if the cease and desist notices start flying if people successfully decode the firmware on the 1D X or 1D C. Magic Lantern actually responded earlier today on twitter:


Magic Lantern will never touch the 1D series of cameras. http://t.co/pmIowRgl
@autoexec_bin
Magic Lantern

It’s also worth mentioning that plenty of other companies are doing what Canon is doing with two separate models and similar hardware. For example, RED’s SCARLET and EPIC cameras contain identical hardware inside, but the internal boards on SCARLET, according to RED, are not up-to-spec to handle the increased data rates of EPIC — though we don’t have much choice but to take their word on that as no hacking has been done thus far on RED firmware.

It will be interesting to see how the 1D C sells. Canon knows they aren’t going to sell as many as the 1D X, and that’s part of the reason for the price difference. I can’t help but think that a firmware hack for the 1D X would help sell a ton more cameras and actually be beneficial to the company in the end — but then again, I can’t see their financials, so it’s hard to know what they spent on R&D for both and how many cameras they need to sell at a specific price to recoup that.

This is definitely not the end of this story, and we’ll keep you updated as more information comes out.

Do you think Canon should allow hacking just as they’ve always done, or do you believe they have a business to run, so they should be able to make some money in the process and recoup development costs? Would you consider buying a 1D X if the firmware was modified to allow 4K or clean HDMI? Let us know your thoughts in the comments.

Link: Inside the Canon EOS-1D C — Canon Rumors

Related Posts

  1. New and Improved Magic Lantern AJ5.0 Firmware for the Canon 5D Mark II Released
  2. Magic Lantern is Working on the 5D Mark III After Canon Firmware Update
  3. Magic Lantern is Coming to the Canon 7D

COMMENT POLICY

We’re all here for the same reason: to better ourselves as writers, directors, cinematographers, producers, photographers... whatever our creative pursuit. Criticism is valuable as long as it is constructive, but personal attacks are grounds for deletion; you don't have to agree with us to learn something. We’re all here to help each other, so thank you for adding to the conversation!

Description image 176 COMMENTS

  • Wow, Canon will never get a cent of my money. DEATH TO CANON!

    • Yeah bollox to canon – someone is bound to do it , in fact , that is the worst thing they could have said because it sounds like an Internet challenge to all those happy hackers out there ;
      …hmmmmm very interesting post ! The might of canons legal team ?
      Whatever ! they should be watching the competition more IMHO rather than some spotty geekzoid ( like me )
      Patiently awaiting to see how 2013 pans out for my hard earned buck – canon should embrace some changes rather than get peeps backs up – It also seems when it suits
      Magic lantern haven’t been slammed With a law suit because I suspect magic lantern actually enhanced sales :
      A rather hypocritical ” when it suits ” boo from the independent film making gallery from me !

      • Exactly. As soon as they make it forbidden fruit, it’s ripe for the picking. The inference from Canon is a whiplash reaction in protecting their high end turf.

  • Not gonna lie, Canon is starting to piss me off with their marketing schemes. They’re never interested in creating the BEST possible camera for the LEAST possible price. They want to make incremental improvements and jack up prices. Basically the complete OPPOSITE of BlackMagic, Panasonic, and RED. I understand cameras like the C300 are great, but seriously… 20,000 for 1080p and 720p slow motion…. it’s a joke. They add some extra ports, some internal ND filters, and hike up the price to 20,000… Where as RED tries to pack in as much as they can into the Scarlet without stomping all over their Epic, but it’s freakishly close. Look at how much of a distinction Canon made between the C300 and C500 to “justify” the pricing difference. They’re just holding back and it’s stupid.

    I’ve never owned a Canon so I probably have a biased POV, but I can’t imagine Canon trying or wanting to do anything groundbreaking anytime soon. Eventually I think it may come back and bite them.

    Sorry for the rant. I love the 1DX on paper, and have heard some great things about it, so statements like these really make me bitter :O

    • Well, they are in it for the money… that’s what happens. A business isn’t run by trying to offer something at the lowest price if it will sell at a higher one

      • Isn’t that what Apple does? and how many of us own iPhones/ iPads? (im still a blackberry curve guy, so don’t laugh at me. lol)

      • I understand they’re in it for the money, but there needs to be a balance between making money and doing what’s best for your customers, otherwise they’ll just move along. Which i feel we may be seeing from all the other comments ;)

        – Ron Parida, Los Angeles based Automotive Commercial Director and Photographer

    • absolutely right!
      Canon didn’t give a chances their customers.
      WHY?
      I think, cann’t upgrade a 1DX as 1DC by firmware.

  • I really don’t see where any legal consequence would come into play for someone modifying or hacking the firmware of a camera they purchase, and then redistributing that found engineering for free. If they were selling it, and using coding that was provided by Canon for camera operation, I could see that being some form of infringement – but if it’s handed out and people are willing to take the risk on messing with their camera and voiding their warranty – i don’t see how that is at all conflicting on Canon’s business (unless of course they made some argument that it prevented sales of the 1DC versus an increase in 1DX purchases to be modded). Regardless, I think the sheer pricepoint will likely keep people hesitant from doing too much of their own reverse engineering on the body (1DX).

    • Joe Marine on 01.9.13 @ 1:34PM

      It’s Canon’s intellectual property. It’s exactly the same situation as buying software. You’re not allowed to modify software and then upload that modified software online.

      • Right, I understand that. However, defining IP in such a case can be a slippery slope, especially with the amount of open source coding that exists currently. Should someone hack a 1DX and stumble upon some codec that existed outside of canon’s R&D at one point in time, you run into some interesting battles. look at where the music industry and art / design industry currently exist with the terms of IP. The further you delve into it, the more you begin to realize how complicated things can really get in a court of law. (I only use these as examples as i have a more in-depth career history in design and music)

      • Isn’t it more like a plug in? Software makers can’t ban other developers from even selling plug ins that work with their software right?

        • Joe Marine on 01.9.13 @ 2:01PM

          A plug-in isn’t fundamentally changing the software, it’s simply adding. Software makers benefit from plug-ins anyway, because they can add features and actually make their product better overall. It’s also difficult to develop everything for every need, so software makers look to third parties to fill those needs.

          • Pardon me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t the ML manual say it doesn’t alter your firmware, it only rides on it?

          • Joe Marine on 01.9.13 @ 2:52PM

            Yes, I had a previous comment that stated otherwise, but I’ve now been corrected. Magic Lantern simply runs on top of the firmware.

      • Swami Digital on 01.9.13 @ 3:02PM

        Decoding the firmware and modifying it is reverse engineering. In this case Canon’s IP does not apply unless there is a patent in play. (Which you can’t have reverse engineered because the patent is publicly disclosed.) However, for almost all software reverse engineering is prohibited by the EULA, in which case you are in breach of contract, and case law reinforces this. If a firmware EULA is supplied with the camera they have legal basis to prosecute someone reverse engineering and providing modified firmware, but there was no EULA explicitly mentioning the firmware with my Canon DSLR. It is possible they may have done this with the 1DX though, but I don’t own one to confirm, and have no desire to own one given the alternatives out there.

        • Joe Marine on 01.9.13 @ 3:03PM

          What you’re saying sounds right – my understanding was wrong before, and I’ve been corrected now on what is actually happening with this particular firmware. It’s not necessarily the case with other camera hacks, and that is the source of my misunderstanding in the first place.

      • Tell that to the judges that ruled against Apple’s attempt take legal action against individuals jailbreaking their iPhones. As long as these hacks are not being sold for profit or promoting piracy, the courts tend to rule in favor of those modifying their devices.

        http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/07/feds-ok-iphone-jailbreaking/

  • Brian Hawkins on 01.9.13 @ 1:31PM

    I don’t see how Canon has any legal right to tell people what they can or cannot do with their cameras.

    • Joe Marine on 01.9.13 @ 1:36PM

      Yes, you personally can do whatever you want with your camera, but this quote from the anonymous Canon source is referring to people putting hacked firmware online for download. That is the part Canon can, and might, do something about.

      • ruben huizenga on 01.9.13 @ 2:20PM

        From what i understand, ML is an add-on that runs alongside Canon’s firmware.

        “Magic Lantern is an enhancement atop of Canon’s firmware that frees your Canon DSLR, allowing you to use many useful features. It is an open (GPL) framework for developing extensions to the official software. ”

        (From their user’s guide.)

        Provided they haven’t stolen or altered any Canon code, is this not the same as running Linux on your pc?

        • Joe Marine on 01.9.13 @ 2:54PM

          Yes, Magic Lantern simply runs on top of the Canon firmware. I don’t know if it’s the same as running Linux on your PC technically because that’s actually a whole can of worms if you know anything about GNU/Linux, but from my understanding now it is similar to running an app on a phone.

  • Canon is late to the game and they’re using their brand loyalty and wide user base to finance their development in this market segment.

    I have no doubt that in 5 years, Canon will be a leader, but not on my dime.

  • marklondon on 01.9.13 @ 1:39PM

    I assume the two cams are 95% the same. Does it annoy me that the 1DC is not under 10k and a slamdunk for me, a hybrid shooter? Yes. But car companies do this, and every electronics maker does this. I don’t hate them for it to the point of not considering buying their product. Audis and VWs are almost identical under the skin. One costs 40% more because of how it looks! That’s business.
    As to the C300, its become the dominant camera in its segment. That’s a strong argument that Canon priced it perfectly.

  • So in other words, getting 4K out of the 1DX is completely possible. I think everyone is losing respect for canon. It’s funny that even the data ratios and processing capabilities it is possible to get 4K out of a 5D Mark III but may only last 3-4 minutes because of heat issues but still very capable.

  • I would certainly purchase a 1DX if I could use the 1DC software on it. Especially because I’ve been thinking of purchasing the C100. 4k is future proof and I’m still used to the dslr ergonomics so it would be an easy upgrade for me. How could they possibly find out I hacked my 1DX anyway? Oh no I’ve said to much!!

  • If it’s so similar why don’t the cynical fucksters at Canon release the 1DX at a much lower price…i.e a price that reflects production costs rather than opportunism.

    Anyhow…won’t be long before they will be forced to stop such price gouging by Blackmagic or some other value for money, kick-arse innovator…

  • Jacob Ladder on 01.9.13 @ 2:04PM

    I find this hilarious. “You can do whatever you want to our $500-$3500 camera but once you cross into $6000+ territory it’s all of a sudden a problem. Why not make this claim across the board?

    • I don’t seee any problems on the 1DX or the C100. Both capable cameras. Guys on canon are not stupid, they price whatever they want and paople will pay. Simple. If some can’t buy their high end stuff then use MKII or 60D and be happy.

      BMCC came to shake things it a bit but right now is almost vaporware, so i don’t think canon will move a bit from where things are right now…

      1DC will become a hit really fast I guess…

  • I’ll probably get flamed for this but here goes… The comments here lead me to think 2 things.

    1. We are spoiled and ungrateful for the amazing technology that we have access to today that just 10yrs ago we did not. I got into film in the early 90s and I sure wish I had the tools then that we all have available to us now. Back then, to get similar image quality and production value I would have had to spend a fortune AND much of it would have still only been rental gear rather than owned gear that I would eventually be able to pay off.

    It reminds me of the classic Louis C.K. monologue when he talks about being on a plane and the person beside him starts whining and complaining because there’s no wi-fi available. “You’re sitting in an armchair at 20,000 feet, you have an alcoholic beverage in front of you, a 3 course meal and you’re travelling at 200mph! Why are you complaining?! This is AMAZING!”

    2. Joe is absolutely right about the R&D costs incurred by Canon and how users are perfectly able to do what they want with their cameras but uploading hacks to that software is an entirely different matter. The opinions in some of these comments suggests that there is a generation of people out there that have no respect for basic Intellectual Property rights. I wonder how you will feel when the movie you’ve spent 2yrs+ of your life making suddenly gets pirated by thousands. Will you feel the same way about copyright when you’re struggling to pay off your maxed credit cards whilst thousands of people are enjoying your work for free thanks to P2P file sharing?

    Is Canon expensive compared to some competitors’ similarly specced gear? Yes. However, that doesn’t give you the right to pirate their products.

    • I really think this style of arguing needs to die out. We can keep reflecting on the past, but that shouldn’t change what we demand in the present. You’re asking us to calm down and be thankful we’re getting a 4k camera at $14k, when it’s clear Canon has been overcharging and under-delivering for the cost. Why would anyone be grateful for this? We’re used to technology being refreshed every 12-18 months, if not sooner.

      Yes, it is “amazing” what we’ve accomplished so far, as well as where we’re headed. That doesn’t mean we can’t voice our expectations and complaints when a camera company isn’t keeping up with others in many respects. It would be rather backwards to keep silent.

      • You saying “what we demand” kind of makes my point. What gives you the right to demand anything? I’m not asking anyone to calm down although you do seem a little upset. If you don’t like a product, don’t buy it. My point is that having access to all these tools has created a sense of entitlement, as illustrated by “we demand”.

        • We have the right to demand from Canon – without the indie film community, they wouldn’t even have had a rep in the filmmaking business to begin with. We gave them their friggin’ balls and they spat in our face.

          • Reality check Voltaire. Indie filmmakers make up a small percentage of Canon’s market share. Sorry if that hurts but its true – look it up. As for giving your balls, well, perhaps you should have saved those for your sex life or something rather than give them to a company who’s sole purpose is to make money. Sorry Canon spat in your face – Did the spittle come at you at 60fps in glorious 720p just to really make you mad?

            I recommend you pour your drama into your next production for the benefit of your audience. You’ll get much more validation from an appreciative audience than a camera company.

        • Perhaps we’re seeing how the world works a bit differently – my understanding was that companies don’t tell us what we want, it’s the purchasers that voice that. We can explore Advertising 101 of “telling the buyer what they want vs what they need”, and it’s clear that Canon is doing just that.

          You’re right that we don’t have to buy their products, but many of us have owned Canon products, and want to keep the company on-track with what the consumer would like.

          Of course we make new demands – when things aren’t working right, or keeping up with other areas of technology, and we’re absolutely entitled to say that we should get this or that from the company. Where would we be if we always sat in “awe” of what was given to us? It’s much, much better to progress the technology by saying what works and doesn’t work for us, and twice the price for a nearly identical camera shouldn’t sit well with anyone. Being told not to mess with the software should raise quite a few eyebrows as well.

          • Agreed Brendan. I certainly am not in awe of Canon (or any manufacturer for that matter) my point above was for the purpose of illustration only. We are entitled to express what we feel in regards to the pros and cons of a product but who can fault Canon for ignoring users when they rant as some people in these comments are doing? As for the legal threat re: hacking, it’s important to remember that this is just a quote from an unknown Canon person at CES – hardly an official company statement.

    • Oh, i totally agree with you – but you have to remember, if you have that stance on IP in general, you have to live by it, which is practically unavoidable nowadays. If you’ve ever enjoyed a video on youtube that didn’t receive permission for a song it chose to use – such would call that hypocrisy. All i’m getting at, is that IP is a difficult foundation to hold a flame to, and it gets exploited daily this day and age, and that the term “fair” hardly gets taken into context. I’d be hard-pressed to believe Canon has never infringed on IP rights of others.

      • I’ve heard this argument many times before. Firstly, ignorance of the law is not a defense “Sorry, I didn’t know it was copyrighted material”. Secondly, though I agree with numerous cases being unavoidable, my point was in regards to knowingly infringing on intellectual property and consciously sharing it, in some cases for personal profit. It’s one thing to accidentally watch a youtube video with illegally used music in it, it’s entirely different thing to make money off of someone else’s hard work.

        • well see, making money is where the line is drawn and lawsuits come into play. it’s the sharing of that content for free – free from any sort of gain or profit – that it becomes an issue of debate

          • Very true Aaron. At the same time, one has to factor in that even “free” undermines the basic value of a product which has in some cases, gone through years of development, research and testing not to mention massive marketing expenses making the consumer aware of its existence.

            Could Canon give us the dream camera for under $3,000? Of course they could. As could any of the major manufacturers. But it would undermine not only their own product lines, their R&D of many years, their future development cycle and all of these same elements for every other company out there making similar products. The manufacturers aren’t making cameras to make our dreams come true, their running a business and a businesses is designed to make profit for its shareholders.

    • On one side yes.. but we really dont know what they really planned. What If I told you that The 1D X was possible at 4K, but they held it back for the 1D C? Knowing that the parts are identical, but purposely held back. Its more about the principles for me, its just bad practice. Then to add on the possibility of a lawsuit? Thats like fanning the flame.

    • I’ll totally concede to your second point, but being “spoiled”? No way. In one of the responses above, you ask what gives us the right to demand anything? The fact that we pay for the R&D. It is someone’s job to develop and advance imaging technology. I pay their salary because I spend quantities of money on camera gear that my friends with 9-5 jobs find outrageous. I am freelancer. There is risk and there is serious investment that goes with the territory. That is my job – to shoot. Their job is to advance imaging technology, and I pay them quite well for it. The notion that we are “spoiled” presumes that we aren’t contributing anything and that this is some kind of charitable act bestowed on us. No way.

    • Agni Ortiz on 01.9.13 @ 4:25PM

      The understanding that piracy is the same as theft is incorrect. Nobody takes the original and deprives the legit owner of anything else as hypothetical potential sales. Nobody is advocating to steal anything from Canon, or anybody else for that matter. but the IP scheme should change with society, not the other way around. To think that by forcing society to accept an old scheme to ensure the same old players and corporations can still profit as before is not is not keeping up for reality . IP may still be used to sell great rock classics as jingles for laundry ads, but that is not what this site and others like it are all about. With so much new talent wanting to be found, it is my personal experience that if any form of artwork, music, film , video etc, is enjoyed by thousands, there is a net benefit to the original creators, even when some people might not pay for their “enjoying share” of the product itself.

      • Agni Ortiz on 01.9.13 @ 4:28PM

        I meant to type “keeping up with reality”.

        • It seems like you do not value the creative process. Please tell me how I can pay my rent with free sharing of my work? Don’t let dislike of corporations color your perspective. The same Intellectual Property law that a large corporation uses is also available to you.

          Since you’re so not bothered by free loaders and don’t need money to live, please post links to your work so I can host it on my subscription only website and profit from your hard work.

  • vinceGortho on 01.9.13 @ 2:21PM

    Why doesn’t canon make the 1dx a 2k version of the 1dc?
    Give it respectable compression and sharpness and log gamma profiles that only work in a super35 crop.

  • Neil, what a joke comparing pirating movies to buying and owning a $6K+ camera and wanting it to be better by installing a firmware.

    Canon are obviously scared as they know it is possible, I would certainly buy the 1DX if I could get similar outputs as the 1DC, infact I am sure it will be done.

    Canon should do like Skeptikal said and reduce the price of the 1DX as they are deffo going to miss out when the hack gets released!

    • Your comment pretty much illustrates my point. Intellectual property rights are no joke and you’re just angry that you can’t have exactly what you want. Like I said, entitlement is a problem. Life is tough. We can’t get everything we want without paying for it. Get used to it. Don’t like Canon? Then don’t buy their products. It really is that simple. The fact that Canon continues to turn a profit shows that there are plenty of folks out there that are quite happy to spend money on the gear Canon makes.

      It seems to me that people complaining about the 1DX aren’t really angry at Canon but at the fact that they can’t afford to buy the latest sexy camera. I’d love a Ferrari but I can’t afford one and I’m not going to get angry at Ferrari for pricing their cars so high. Clearly the Ferrari is not aimed at a consumer like me. Perhaps the Canon 1DX isn’t aimed at you.

      • Bozo the Clown on 01.9.13 @ 4:17PM

        You’re saying is that if a person purchases a product from a manufacturer and then alters that product to be capable of more than its intended purpose, that person is somehow infringing on the manufacturer’s intellectual property rights?

        Poor Canon may not recoup all that money they poured into developing the 1D-C’s heat sink. I will weep for them.

        • What you do with a camera you’ve purchased with your own money is entirely up to you providing you don’t promote what you’ve done and/or profit from it. As other commenters have stated here, educate yourself in regards to intellectual property law and how businesses function.

          • Agni Ortiz on 01.9.13 @ 4:38PM

            In the world of motorsports, to alter and to achieve higher performance of any vehicle is the norm, and , and making public how is done or charging for it is also accepted, so i do not see why should be any different with improving the performance of an image acquiring device. The same has been done with computers from day one. Those claiming otherwise should have their head examined.

          • Bozo the Clown on 01.9.13 @ 4:42PM

            That explains why auto manufacturers sue “tuners” who extract more power by selling reengineered/reprogrammed OEM engine management software (for ca$h dollarz) like… all the time! Totally happens constantly! Lawsuits up the wazoo!

  • *I meant reduce the price of the 1DC!

  • Most of the replies here indicate that NFS readers (or at least repliers) are probably between 10-20 years old. Otherwise you all have issues [such as lack of education I guess?] understanding how businesses operate, especially successful ones. This is Marketing 101. Also, camera brands are not your girlfriend or family. They don’t give a shit about you, they don’t know you, and guess what, they are not “supposed” to.

    Oh btw, A1ex (ML) had already stated several moths ago that they would never hack an expensive model such as the 1DX. The guys are not stupid (obviously), they know what the boundaries are and respect Canon for not having created any issues so far. So how come all the irrelevant people have issues with it? hilarious..

    p.s IP Law..just read the damn thing and then make an effort to understand it instead of just reacting to any bullsh**t they tell you.

    • haha why does respect all of the sudden come with a camera that costs over 5 grand? rather than all the other models under such price point – maybe they’re not hacking those models because they know few people own them, and for those that do, aren’t concerned with having a hack at their disposal (and i think i can say this as i own a 1dx, c300, and red epic – not just some kid complaining about toys)

      and many people happen to know a good bit about IP law, and when you do read up on it, you might notice how much it begins to change as circumstances change – Youtube will always be your prime example.

      • It’s like I actually invited the most immature person to answer..And unfortunately I’ve studied current IP law, I’ve had several case studies, I can help if you’re interested, but you probably aren’t..had to do it in filmmaking school, had to really study it when I did my Msc’s on DTV Management & Production + my bro has a Msc on IP law ;) Anyway..In case you haven’t noticed the ML team doesn’t hate Canon, they respect and like Canon products, that’s why they hacked them in the first place.

        This thread is ridiculous, very much like the article in the first place. As I stated earlier, the ML team, and specifically A1ex, never even implied they would attempt to hack the 1DX, but exactly the opposite (3-4 months ago, when EOSHD, the father of camera trolls, in another inaccurate article implied they were the same). For OBVIOUS reasons, A1ex went ahead and stated they would never mess with such an expensive camera, mainly in order not to provoke or create damages to the specific company. I guess when NFS readers go through adulthood it’s going to be a great realization. This article has no other purpose than calling the trolls.

        • Alright, i’ll give you that. I can secede to knowing when i’ve been beat – but contrary to your assumption, I am very interested in IP law; particularly on how it deals with the changing tides of technology. So in such a case, i would be rather interested to know what you’ve had to learn on the matter

  • Chris Lambert on 01.9.13 @ 2:41PM

    To hell with canon gimping cameras on purpose the c300 worked great so they added r&d to move the LCD to a worse position and design an sd card section, are we spoiled technoligically? Yes. Are we bring screwed by the company were propping up? Absolutely! Just imagine we’re we as a species would be without this milking of one advancement to baby step into something they could have easily done for nothing, we could be living on mars or some thing but instead were being taken advantage of and screwed like a $1 whore

    Ah hell ill just go buy a black magic and burn my 550d end of return of the Jedi style

    On a serious note can’t we just donate to ML’s legal fee’s until they get enough money to go for it

  • Someone sooner or later will usurp canon in a wonderful penny wise pound foolish manner by releasing a decent low cost all bells and whistles camera , With possible add on capabilities via software updates ect ect – in fact , that could be a real kickstarter initiative …?
    Come on – let’s see someone kick sand in the eyes of the big shakers and makers ! Some healthy rebellion and imagination from a company with a passion for bringing it to a more affordable level required fir sure

  • john jeffreys on 01.9.13 @ 3:02PM

    It seems that canon doesn’t give a shit about the filmic process and the filmmaker (like RED and arri etc do) and just wants to sell cameras.

    • Exactly right. If they did, they wouldn’t be charging $10,000 – $15,000 for compressed 8-bit codecs…

  • Raphael Wood on 01.9.13 @ 3:06PM

    Meanwhile I create groundbreaking work with Red cameras while giving Canon the middle finger they so rightly deserve.

    • Yo Raphael, is this comment sarcastic or serious?

      • john jeffreys on 01.9.13 @ 6:27PM

        serious as cancer, this dude doesnt mess around look how cool and menacing his picture is

        • Raphael Wood on 01.9.13 @ 6:51PM

          Intimidating right?
          How’s that career working out for you mate?
          Oh wait, you don’t have one…

          • john jeffreys on 01.9.13 @ 8:36PM

            as if owning a nice-ish camera makes me a better or worse filmmaker than you.
            as if anybody even cares about you or your 4 thousand dollar camera anyway.
            as if you know who i am in real life and the people that are around me.
            as if you know anything about the projects i am doing right now.
            as if you know how many festivals ive been in, how many girls i pull, how many magazines and blogs have been all over me, hence why i have to use a fake name on here

            back the fuck up bruh, lil internet thug think youre so cool and tough, you dont know me

          • all we need is love, love is all we need, love is all we need! :D

          • Raphael Wood on 01.9.13 @ 9:34PM

            Poor little “John Fakeys”

            Felt the need to justify yourself did you?

            Bullseye I take it.

            Why, don’t tell me you’re so traumatized cause mommy didn’t give you 2K to buy a new camera that you still feel the need to bring that up? Poor kid.

            Oh, I know all I need to know about you, you’re the troll under the bridge that is NoFilmSchool, you smell, at least metaphorically speaking.

            Poor guy, I pity you.

            To avoid you further humiliation I’m just going to stop this “conversation” here.

      • Raphael Wood on 01.9.13 @ 6:53PM

        Let me guess, the word “groundbreaking” created that doubt.

        Serious.

        • I was just wondering what you meant by groundbreaking?

          • Raphael Wood on 01.10.13 @ 5:02AM

            It’s groundbreaking in my context, I will be doing something that hasn’t been made here at all, here being Portugal.

            So, groundbreaking on a national scale but not really on an international level.

            Tell you what, when it gets released maybe you’ll watch it and share your opinion?

  • Some of the replies here indicate the wrong kind of people are coming to this website, this site was designed for low-budgeters and people who didn’t want/couldn’t afford film school, not some arrogant upstart hipsters with more money than sense.

    Of course Canon are trying to run a business and make money but their business model is flawed. They keep releasing pretty much the same cameras at different price points and like someone said above; with small incremental changes… and in this case where the hardware is near identical, crippling one and selling the other for almost double the price!!

    Ok, so they are trying to make money but why must we put up with these outrageous prices?! When they could still easily make a turn-over a lower price and also entice more people to buy them…

    • God Himself on 01.9.13 @ 3:17PM

      “Hipsters” on use the word “hipster”..
      I think you’re onto something.

    • How is their business model flawed Dr (see what I did there?)? How did you learn such a difficult word? Do you even understand what product line means? How is the no.1 photo camera/lenses brand flawed in their marketing? People, please, stop reading bullshit from Eoshd and other non-confirmed sources. It’s tiring and makes you look like a 5 year old.

      Btw, since when 3K is expensive for a pro photo + FF video camera? You obviously have nothing to do with the industry, in any way. This was fun. But guess again who the hipsters are here.. ;)

  • Boycott Canon. Everyone. Give ‘em a frggin’ wake-up call.

  • Wow Canon, that’s low. If you want to learn how to handle hacking, don’t look at companies like Sony for a cue… Stick to plugging software holes or even better embrace the community that is paying for your gear.

    If you think it is inevitable that someone will “steal” your business, maybe you should steal it yourself – like Apple stole the iPod business with the iPhone. Protectionist practices are short sighted, doomed to fail and guaranteed to alienate customers priming them with a desire to jump ship as soon as the opportunity arises.

  • marklondon on 01.9.13 @ 3:26PM

    @Micheal is correct. This is a ridiculous amount of whining. As for the ‘some kickstarter company are going to come in and kick Canon/Sony/et als ass’ please note that RED, founded by a very wealthy person, already attempted that. How’s that going? I would say, only ok so far, and nowhere near as disruptive as they hoped.
    The most important tech in the video business this century was released by Canon. Not an accident. And it was done on behalf of stills shooters, who are still 95% of the 1-6k camera market.
    The prosumer video market is a tiny, mostly unprofitable segment in the imaging business. The bottom end is being eaten up by phones, the mid-range by DSLRs. The margins are razor thin. That means no fat for R&D.
    The pro video market is small, stable and VERY profitable. Keeping those two apart is very good business for everyone involved.
    Every C300 sold means another amount of money goes back into Canon’s R&D that may eventually give you the camera you want. If professionals are willing to pay those prices, because essentially thanks to tax writeoffs the actual net cost should be almost ZERO, most people should be very grateful. Because while some of it will be profit, a lot of it goes back into building the next wave of stable camera tech that will give you a 4K DSLR for under 5k within 24 months.
    So I can’t help but think if you’re complaining about not being able to afford the primary tool that is essential for your business that you are not really a business (again, over time that tool is free). In which case, even an $8k camera seems a bit much for a hobby.

    • Mark and Michael, thank you for giving me hope again that there are some readers of NFS who aren’t completely insane.

      • It’s almost like 95% of the readers need a shrink, someone to love them, or graduate from school. No idea on business plans or marketing, filmmaking, broadcasting, technology, etc, but still strong enough to express themselves. It’s becoming a scary place..

    • You’re being ridiculous – “may eventually give you the camera you want.” – f**k that. Andrew over at EOSHD said it best; “When we buy a camera, a piece of hardware we want to be getting the full capabilities of that hardware and we want the production costs to decide the pricing. If I pay $6k more for a camera, there has to be a good reason for it. If I find out that my $6k went towards changing a line of code in firmware and adding a heat sink, I’d be annoyed. Equally, if I was a 1D X owner shooting rather poor 1080p on hardware that was actually capable of 4K in Canon LOG, I’d not be getting what I paid for in terms of the hardware and I’d wonder also as a 5D Mark III owner why my HDMI output was 720p not uncompressed 1080p like on the Nikon D800.

      I don’t care about marketing or Canon’s business strategies but I do care about my 5D Mark III and 1D X being as good as they can possibly be, with nothing turned off in firmware.

      As for Canon their reputation is at stake here. If when buying a Canon camera I am never sure if it is crippled to protect the one above it, I don’t have confidence in them as a company.”

      • The only thing ridiculous around here are the comments you’ve made throughout this thread. As for crippling, the only crippling being done here is that done to your reasoning and perspective by way of the nonsense you’re spreading from Andrew at EOSHD.

        • Neil if you bought a Toyota Prius that could travel at 150kmph and Toyota applied a software speedo limit of doing 80kph.. I guess you wouldn’t be pissed… Enjoy the extra long drive my Hipster friend.

          • ACtually, that’s called a speed limiter and most vehicles can go “faster” than they’re spec’d. It’s ECU controlled, has been this way since the dawn of the computer managed vehicle.

            The correct analogy would be gas mileage: if your vehicle’s ECU set out a fuel to air ratio that wasn’t as efficient as it could possibly be, and someone released a chip for your ECU to allow you to override and make it more efficient–or in the tuner’s case, less (there’s a good reason for this) then would you buy it?

            That’s up to you guys to decide.

            And yes, these things do exist.

    • Hmm well if you think ‘writing it off’ and ‘FREE” are one and the same thing I could argue that YOU are not really running a business either…not properly anyway. Even when you write something off 100%, lets say of an $8k camera, you will only ever get an $8k tax write off against your nominal tax rate. So unless you are paying 100 cents in the dollar tax…you will never get back the full $8k.

      Effectively your tax rate is the maximum discount you can ever expect to get back from any capital purchase and usually company tax rates are lower than 30%. That’s a LOOOONG way from being free!

      Just saying ;-)

      • Also, many here are just starting out (that’s why we come to NFS) so we can’t justify a 10K+ plus camera, does that make us not a legitimate business? of-course not!

        • Yeap, as you said you’re still learning, so no, you’re opinion is not legit yet.. ;) And no, I never thought NFS was just for underaged kiddies that have no idea on the filmmaking process and business, and using the lack of money as an excuse. Work and buy your f***n camera while learning. Until 10 years ago you would never afford a proper camera in the first place.

      • marklondon on 01.9.13 @ 6:01PM

        @Paul. I take some of your point, but please understand that I work in an international business, so for us, depending on where we buy it, its 100% deductible year one. A LOT of production companies, not just muti-nationals, are set up this way.
        Even within a single tax territory, if you can’t write off almost any major capital purchase, certainly under $20k, over 3-5 years then your business is in serious trouble. Its certainly not generating enough cashflow to live on.

        For those starting out, there are are a ton of great cameras that aren’t a 1DC or C300 that will get you work to the point where you can afford them. I would say 99.9% of everyone you’ve ever lionised or read about started out with crappy kit. Stanley Kubrick is very much the exception, not the rule. :-)
        Peter Jackson started out with a borrowed 16mm camera and ‘ends’ he’d beg from commercial companies while working his night job. I knew him then. He would have cried to have seen what a (deliberately crippled!) T4i can do.
        Buy the best you can afford, and go for it.

        Finally, re the original legal issue, we’re pretty sure that you can attempt to hack your own camera if you want. However, marketing that hack puts you in different legal territory as ML seems to realise.

    • I cannot believe there is so much opposition to what Mark is saying especially when he is right. If you acquire a tax deductible asset that pays for itself, why not consider it free. Its true, if a 8k camera is far too expensive for the business, then supporting the living costs of multiple people from company income is very unlikely. The reality of the situation is that some people here are complaining about a camera being too expensive and they are not working the industry yet. Thats a little naive.

  • Canon .. hahahaha .. u r becoming stupid or stupider?

    well done you are already losing market for setting higher prices … and now pissing of your customer .. well done

  • This is just shit really, and people can and should be able to express their opinions. Its not like what we say will change anything but whats so bad about expressing it? Even Canon defenders will be a disappointed by this news…

    If you dont like their treatment, then move on. Thats what I did. Sucks for people heavily invested in Canon glass though…

  • It’s hardly whining – on the contrary , it’s inspiring that Sony , the black magic cinema camera ect ect are finding niches in the market with lower price points –
    You have some valid points – however , it’s sad that canon who after all helped us revolutionise film making are being slowly side lined by their seemingly myopic greed , hence the double figure price point in the difference in both cameras and frankly if there was a reversible firmware update available I would jump all over it

  • hilarious, if i payed for it, its mine, meaning i can even shove it up my a$$ and nothing can stop me from doing that

    • If you’re going to do that you should do it with an Epic with the new Dragon sensor – you’ll get a lot more Dynamic Range and might even get an image out of your a$$ :)

      • I can’t, there’s already a c300 and ikonoskop a cam dll up there, dont have much space left

        • You need a new codec with solid compression. That’ll work. Although too much compression can lead to constipation…

  • If someone can hack the 1DX into a 1DC.

    They should go for it. Cause I have seen tests
    of Black Magic ProRes compared to 1DC and
    1DC stuff came out about one whole notch better.

  • Agni Ortiz on 01.9.13 @ 4:45PM

    To limit the further improvement of any product, by policy of marketing tactics, is like trying to limit the use of the wheel. Go ahead, may as well try that when you are at it.

  • Now I am 100% sure the “5d revolution” was an accident.

Comments pages: [1] 2 3

LEAVE A COMMENT