November 15, 2013

Canon Doesn't Think Lower-End Cameras Should Have RAW

Canon_EOS_CinemaThere has been plenty of talk over the last couple years about Canon and their product strategy as it relates to their Cinema and DSLR cameras. While their cinema cameras -- specifically the C300 -- have been incredibly popular, there are many who wonder why the company can't offer better quality internally when very budget-priced cameras from Blackmagic are doing ProRes, DNxHD, and RAW without needing external recorders. At the Inter BEE 2013 conference (Japan's version of NAB), Dan Chung from Newsshooter sat down with Yoshinari Onda, the global product manager for Canon's Cinema EOS cameras, to ask some of these questions and also explore the recent AF firmware upgrade for the C100. Check out the fantastic interview below:

It's not a secret that the success of the video mode on the Canon 5D Mark II surprised the company, and they were really thrust into making digital cinema cameras by accident. Video was included in that camera late in the game as a way for photographers and journalists to add video to the stills they might already have been capturing for a particular story and they really had no idea filmmakers could benefit from the technology. It would be another few years, however, before they would introduce models that combined the best of their photo and video technologies, with the C300 in November 2011. As Onda said in the interview, there were about 150 people total working on the development team, which now includes two more models, the C100 and C300 (though it's interesting to note that the cinema lens development actually began before the cinema cameras).

Onda also mentions that the Dual Pixel AF which was recently announced, is already a part of the sensor, and just needs to be enabled and the sensor tweaked for performance. It shows that Canon actually has tremendous engineers that are able to do all sorts of things, but whether these things get enabled right from the start is a whole other decision that probably comes down to economics. Things are moving so fast in the video world, however, that if Canon doesn't start including these features that are in the hardware from the start but not enabled, someone else will likely do it. We're now seeing that with the way Blackmagic has implemented RAW capabilities at such an affordable price.

That really leads us to the most enlightening part of the interview (watch starting at about 22:30), the fact that Canon doesn't want to give RAW to lower-end cameras because they see it as a workflow issue. While there is some truth to that, it likely had more to do with that fact that they would have to compress the RAW for CF or SD cards on the lower end cameras. Card speeds have greatly improved (the new CFast format used on the ARRI AMIRA should work well with 1080p/2K RAW), and we've also got much cheaper SSDs than we had when Canon started working on the cinema cameras back in 2008/2009. The company has created very specific product segments within their cinema series by removing certain features, but it's likely that RAW was not something they thought could be implemented very easily, especially because of the compression (though they do have patents for it). This is still one of RED's major advantages, since you get the benefits of RAW but can save on space when you need to.

I'm certainly willing to buy their reasoning for not having RAW or higher than 50Mbps internally on any of their cinema cameras for compatibility and workflow issues, but being stuck in 8-bit internally on a camera as expensive as the C500 (even if it's a good-looking 8-bit), is still a little baffling. The C500 might be their high-end offering, but it relies very heavily on third parties to bring the quality up, since internally it records exactly the same as the C300. It wouldn't be surprising if the C300 was always meant as a flagship, and the C500 and C100 were simply models that came out of them figuring out what they could add or subtract in a cost-effective way.

Canon_EOS1DC_Angle

What's clear to me is that their DSLRs are probably going to lag behind the cinema cameras in terms of video performance for the foreseeable future, except in higher-end models like the 1D C (which itself was probably a mistake of engineering fantastic internals into the 1D X). Canon has many loyal followers, and there is no question that has helped them in this current generation (heck, I own multiple Canon cameras). The familiarity with brand names makes people feel safe, especially those moving from stills to video -- and most of them have been able to stick with the same lenses.

As things evolve though, and other manufacturers include features that Canon is missing, people may start looking elsewhere, especially if they can use Canon lenses. It doesn't have to be this way, as we've seen with the Magic Lantern RAW hack on the DSLR cameras. The hardware is great, and Canon's RAW color science is fantastic, but they are a very slow-moving company. They have great people working for them, but it's likely the higher-ups that are deciding which features to include strictly in terms of economics.

People will always complain no matter what you do, but I think if Canon is really listening to customers, they should hear that people want features that the hardware is capable of. A 5D Mark III for another $500 or $1000 with a fully supported RAW mode and a solid 1080p mode would fly off the shelves. Maybe they won't make as much money as they can with a camera like the 1D C, but how many of those have they sold anyway? They only have to look at the crazy pre-orders for Blackmagic products to know what people really want at the prices they are willing to pay.

Blackmagic Pocket Cinema Camera

With DSLR sales declining, you have to wonder if maybe RAW support and more video-focused features would give them a boost in sales. Certainly these are things people want, even if they aren't going to be using them all the time. Canon isn't going to be able to get away with releasing 8 versions of the same DSLR in the future, so they're going to have to have something up their sleeves as we reach the second and third generation of digital cinema cameras and video on DSLRs.

Thanks again to Dan for the great interview.

What do you think? What should Canon do with their product line to fit in better with other products out there? What would you like to see in the next generation of cinema cameras and DSLRs?

Link: Inter BEE 2013 Live Show Replay: “5d Mkii Was a Kinda Accident for Canon” -- Newsshooter

Your Comment

119 Comments

Not trying to be rude, but I think I would have preferred him to speak in his native tongue and have it subtitled.

November 15, 2013 at 9:43AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

3
Reply
umm..

Umm..., "not to be rude, but" you do realize one guy is Japanese, and one guy is Chinese, right?

November 15, 2013 at 1:19PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

3
Reply
Robert

Don't all Asians speak the same language, just like all white people do?

November 15, 2013 at 1:27PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
avatar
Ryan Koo
Founder
Writer/Director

I don't think he realized they were from different backgrounds... relax he isn't trying to be mean or anything.

November 15, 2013 at 6:23PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

3
Reply
Derek

Haha!

November 15, 2013 at 6:28PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Rob

totally agree with you man!!

November 15, 2013 at 1:25PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

4
Reply
WILL

Haha! Well I have to admit that this thought went through my mind.. But then I just slapped myself in front of the computer..

November 15, 2013 at 3:48PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Pete

Umm, here's a tip for you - shut up.

November 15, 2013 at 4:32PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

3
Reply
shaun wilson

Let's not go overboard here, people. Sometimes there are legitimate issues understanding people speaking with thick accents; everyone has different brains and thus different capacities for language. If it would help with clarity and specificity regarding what is spoken by an important person in an interview, the consideration to use subtitles is not unreasonable.
At least, I've definitely seen subtitles used in situations much less linguistically taxing than this, for better or worse.

Now personally, I had no issues understanding either host or interviewee in that video. While each person may have an easier or harder time understanding accents, I do think that with minimal effort and attention the vast majority of native English speakers in the world should be able to understand Mr. Onda without issue. Does that mean that no one may still prefer subtitles instead? Of course not, and that seems to be what is happening here.

November 15, 2013 at 10:52PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

9
Reply
Mr Blah

I honestly do not going to believe 50% of what Canon or any manufacturing people say about their product, simple because they, for marketing and not being looked down as less than others, will exaggerate their 'work' to make it impressive, basic marketing 101 or rather human nature as a whole. You would hardly see Canon, Sony, or such to put their design down for that matter... just saying...

November 15, 2013 at 9:46AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Johnny

1080 60p for one. Sony has a mirrorless SLR body that cost $500 and can record 1080 60p. RAW is nice, but a good compressed codec that offers 50Mbit 4:2:2 is maybe more practical. Everyone understand that they don't want to cannibalize their higher end video cameras, but the days of offering limited capabilities for a $3k+ body are soon to be over.

November 15, 2013 at 9:49AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

$3K? try limited functionality for the $6K 1Dx and the $11K 1Dc. THAT's what really gets me!!

November 15, 2013 at 12:02PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

3
Reply
sean

My suggestion to Canon: a mirror-less 5D, keeping the same code it could run ML and would be selling like crazy!

November 15, 2013 at 11:27PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

12
Reply

Canon doesn't deserve to be successful for their video product. They just have to say thanks to Magic Lantern.

November 15, 2013 at 10:16AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Marco

I agree totally!!!

November 16, 2013 at 12:20AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

5
Reply
Theuer

Magic Lantern isn't needed to shoot great things with Canon cameras. It just adds some extra tools that you can easily do without. A good cinematographer can do amazing things with all modern-aged cameras. It's the price of the DSLRs and the spectacular image they gave for that price, that made that success. Not Magic Lantern.

November 17, 2013 at 12:22PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

3
Reply

Are you dumb? That fantastic image comes from Magic Lantern Raw. By today's standards, Canon standard H.264 is ugly soft mush.

November 17, 2013 at 8:20PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

2
Reply
S

He's right.
apr would be awesome.
Most folk don't need it though, let alone raw.

Why is raw typed as RAW?

November 15, 2013 at 10:18AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

1
Reply
Paul Russell

To make it clear that it's a way to capture images like JPEG and TIFF - and not a word - even if it's not technically an achronym. This is the way all companies write it, and have been writing it for years, so that's why I also write it that way.

I also prefer RAW over raw because you may have raw footage straight from a camera, that was not, in fact, captured in a RAW format.

November 15, 2013 at 10:26AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

3
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Camera Department

Like you guys said in your entry, they fell ass backwards into video and they have companies like RedRock and Cinevate to thank for it, because their lens adaptors are really what gave way to shooting video with a DSLR. They since have really failed at giving the consumer what they want which is a non-compressed recording format, along with audio inputs, at a reasonable cost. It's hilarious when you call their customer support about a 5D or 7D when you are experiencing issues with the video, and they will tell you, this is not a video camera, it's a still camera...which we all know is a load of crap. If not for the video functionality, the growth of these cameras would be no where near where it is today.
Canon is a company that can't see past themselves to know what's good for the business. With more and more RAW cameras being released every month it seems, they had better start adding that functionality to their lower end cameras...heck, there's already a Magic Lantern hack done for it, so why not just give the consumer what they want...absolutely stupid.

November 15, 2013 at 10:30AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Joe

Hey Joe. Your post stood out. Redrock and Letus made 35mm still lens adaptors for the small chip camcorder market which i bought and used however I would not credit them for helping Canon in any way with the accidental invention of 35mm DSLR video making.

With regards to them not giving them what the consumer wants. I don't think the consumer wants uncompressed recording format unless you are talking about the handful of professional videographers. I myself own the C100 and 5D mk3 and have not even added RAW to the 5D because i have little use for it and the implementation is clunky.

As far as Canon not seeing past themselves. I think they are focusing on what they are doing well and what is doing well which is the Journalist and run and gun Videographers and Web Journalists etc. They are not looking for raw and are more concerned with having a camera that is reliable and footage that can be easily processed and worked with. So i think with the success of both the 5D 3 and the Cinema EOS line Canon had looked far enough.

As far as Canon adding RAW in general. Again most people will not be able to work with it. I have purchased the C100 and have not missed RAW and do not miss slow mo either. The Camera just works, shoots all day and doesn't switch off. Audio sounds great, autofocus is great for the Glidecam and the detachable handle is just cute.

I don't mind a camera not having all the bells and whistles as long as the whistles it provide work flawlessly when my client is breathing down my neck. :)

November 15, 2013 at 12:36PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

1
Reply

Raw on the 5D3 is only "clunky" because it's a hack, it's a totally different experience with Blackmagic, having compressed CinemaDNG files recorded straight to SD or SSD is very convenient and easy to use. No one is disputing how great their cameras are, but I think 8 bit 4:2:0 on the C300/C100 and the DSLRS is not good enough anymore. We need at lease 10bit 4:2:2, you would expect with the C300/C100 being aimed at cinematographers a quality codec would of been implemented not a end consumer delivery format such as H.264. All i'm saying is, Canon make great cameras for Photographers, but their video is starting to become increasingly irrelevant. The only thing the 5DM3 has going for it apart from the RAW hack is it's low light capabilities and it's huge sensor, but in years to come, I don't think it's going to be enough and Canon are going to find that people who buy cameras for video aren't going to looking to buy from them. Blackmagic have 4K with global shutter and Raw for less than $4000, now blackmagic cameras have many flaws as cameras go but what they offer for the price they offer it at is simply amazing. But Imagine in 5 years what it will be like, they'll be producing better cameras with better audio, better functionality but all with Raw, Prores and at 4k, bigger sensors, better low light , who knows. and once that point is reached, I imagine canon will still be offering 8 bit H.264 and wondering why nobody is interested

November 15, 2013 at 10:13PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

2
Reply

Sorry but this is s load of crap. In the real world Virtually everyone is shooting on c300's. I can't get my hands on it in any of the rental houses.

November 16, 2013 at 2:49AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Peter Kelly

No it's not, in the "real world", we don't use anything lower than 10 bit for high end commercial work, in advertisement for broadcast. If you're content is for the web then anything is fine but not for TV. In the UK for instance the standard is 100mbs for any content and since we use a lot of green screen, we usually shoot Raw for pulling Keys, it totally depends on what you use the cameras for. I'm sorry but I really hate ignorant fools who use the the word "In the real word", I guess my world requires better quality than yours. Is Hollywood and the british Film industry also included in your "real world", pretty sure they don't use H.264 on a C300. Get over yourself, you have no idea what the real world is outside of your limited understanding of it. People work in a lot of different ways. For my line of work the C300 is not usable. I do high end commercials where image is the most important factor. I need 10bit and and over, I need at a minimum 422 but obviously Raw and 444 is what we use mostly.

November 16, 2013 at 9:44AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Shaun Fontaine

I'm grading 2 projects at the moment shot on c300 and having to denoise everything to get it past 10bit due to the crappy 8bit codec. It's insane that this codec is on a £10,000 camera haha!

November 16, 2013 at 11:27AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

4
Reply
Kraig

@Peter Kelly.
Ha ha. Not sure what 'real' world you're talking about but, the only reason you can't get your hands on one (if that's even real) is that its very popular with students and people who aren't concerned with or don't have time for much post manipulation of the footage.

Shaun is correct in that high end work demands at least 10 bit. Anyone arguing against that evidently aren't pushing very hard on the image or haven't had the luxury of working in 10bit.

Not saying the C300 doesn't make nice pictures but, 8bit don't hold up in 'real' world against 10.
Arguing that is like saying 1 is more than 2.

November 16, 2013 at 11:37AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

Someone said canons cinema cameras are irrelevant. That's clearly a load of crap. Of course they're not ideal for everything. Like some of the examples you guys point out. Completely true. But They've sold like hot cakes. In the real world they are being used everywhere on a huge variety of stuff. Like them or not calling them irrelevant is daft

November 16, 2013 at 1:25PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Peter Kelly

C300 shoots 8-bit 4:2:2 @50Mbit; C100 is 8-bit 4:2:0 @24Mbit. True, 10-bit would be way better for color correction.

November 17, 2013 at 6:01PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

HDMI out to something like Ninja 2 or Samurai Blade will get the C100 footage to the Pro-Res bit rate. That will up the image quality somewhat. They key, however, is still the price of the unit. According to Convergent Design, its Odyssey Q7 will accept a compressed codec (presumably Pro-Res or XAVC) for FS-700 next month, making it a 4K recorder for ~ $12K. C500 costs double that and, when BMD 4K camera arrives - expected before the New Year - there will be a lot of price competitors for Canon's Cinema line.

November 17, 2013 at 8:22PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
DLD

@Peter Kelly

The claim was not that Canons cameras were irrelevant but that 8bit h264 is irrelevant for professional acquisition. We've all seen h264 footage that holds up remarkably well, however the work required in post to get it there is a false economy when these cameras are now at price parity with (or more expensive than) ones that shoot raw.

November 18, 2013 at 7:33AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

3
Reply
nobody

This headline should be: Canon Have An Opinion. That alone is news enough :)

November 15, 2013 at 10:34AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Kraig

Canon may sell more units by not implementing RAW. Their line of thought may be, 'This third party is hacking our product, which in turn creates a buzz to buy our product, increasing sales. And if that hack destroys the camera, the consumer will have to buy another'. However they would sell much more units if they had an aps-h camera under $2,000 that was built to implement RAW video. At this point, in my opinion, not having this as an option for the consumer is a matter of pride.

November 15, 2013 at 10:44AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

6
Reply
sbsk

If Canon thought they could make money from it, they would release it. But people are buying 5D mk3s at the moment, so why bother. I would rather they put some serious R&D into a RAW Camera for people that actually need RAW as opposed to the hack boys who use it once because its " cool " then use it on a small paid job and kick themselves for 2 weeks while they do the post on the footage :D

November 15, 2013 at 12:43PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

2
Reply

Kick myself? I used the RAW for paid jobs and I am not kicking myself. Obviously it is not an ideal workflow but its usable and fine for what it is. You sound like someone who has never used the 5DIII Raw and are ignorantly bashing something you don't understand.

November 17, 2013 at 8:27PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

7
Reply
S

I think the C100 looks great! But if you don't nail exposure in camera, post will be a nightmare.

November 15, 2013 at 10:53AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Michael Hawk

Try working with RAW heh.

November 15, 2013 at 12:43PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

Ive been able to push C100 footage quite far and it only takes me a couple of hours to grade a project and export.

November 15, 2013 at 12:45PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

2
Reply

People always forget the videographers represent a small fraction of their market for DSLRs. Very small! If they had RAW but only up to 25p people would complain that it doesn't have 60p. Also don't forget that they can't massively advertise a workflow that only interest hobbyists, they have to make a product the vast majority can handle with ease. I have recently ordered a 5DMK3 and the lead-up to the arrival of my camera has been a bit unnerving, all the different card issues, and speeds and reliability, etc etc. People praise the BMCC and BMPC but if you read in-depth reviews those cameras have glaring problems. I mean, you can't format a card or SSD in camera, that's crazy for the average consumer.

There is no perfect camera. If I want to do 4K i can't honestly expect that with a proper workflow for less than 10k USD. And let's add some perspective here, 5 years ago to even have anything close to what the 5D Mark 2 does, would cost ridiculous amounts of cash. Also, alot of the people complainin about the cameras haven't done much with the low-level cameras they have.

November 15, 2013 at 10:53AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

As IF it's THAT small dude.

November 16, 2013 at 11:29AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

10
Reply
Kraig

I'd be surprised if it wasn't far smaller like .05% and of that 20% might want to use RAW.

Think about how many people that read these pages and use 5Ds and how many of those are actively using the Magic Lantern patch and shooting RAW??

November 18, 2013 at 6:48PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

Raw is ok for still photographers but the video people need to go elsewhere I'm guessing, Hmm...nice I believe the new Panasonic GH4 or whatever it's called will be the nail in Canons coffin as far as dslr shooting is concerned. Unless the next Canon DSLR is going to give 10-bit 50+ Mbps they might as well continue with that philosophy, I have to imagine sales of the $11,000.00 1Dc are practically nonexistent by now. 8-bit...really Canon? At least push it to 10-bit. Jeez

November 15, 2013 at 10:55AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

2
Reply
Anthony Marino

Nail in the coffin, people have been saying that for years.... remember the 5d mk2 killers... that never killed. A Camera is a camera... but the lenses that are available for a Canon mount are great and in abundance. I would use a GH camera for personal use but i dunno if I would let the client see it.

November 15, 2013 at 12:49PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

I'll agree, my "nail in the coffin" comment may have sounded a little egregious. Yes Canon does wonderful stills and excellent video. Where I was heading, I meant to say if down the road you're looking for DSLR type ergonomics and your choice is 8-bit vs 10-bit. Using the camera on a paying gig myself especially, I'll take the 10-bit. Everything is pointing in that direction these days, faster processors, drives, etc, why wouldn't Canon unleash Raw for those who want it? I just don't agree, especially after seeing what magic lantern can do. Last, ive noticed more friends and colleagues shifting towards Nikon lenses, even some Chinease over Canon these days. The direction they we're headed whether they it was a surprise or not you would think they've wouldve ruled the camera world by now. Hey the 5D is still a great camera for video, I wish soon manufacturers would commit to only 10-bits and above, over 50 Mbps. Is that too much to ask? There is a difference, sometimes a big one.

November 15, 2013 at 3:45PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

2
Reply
Anthony Marino

Your not gonna use RAW unless you have the time to process it. If i have to give pictures straight away to the client i use JPEG and set colour in camera. If i have time then i shoot RAW and process the images as per my software... however this takes time. I can only imagine the headache of dealing with RAW video for every day things. Happy without it for now. I already fill my hard drives enough.

November 16, 2013 at 6:23AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

1
Reply

Another great piece full of insight, Joe. Thanks!

I'd love to see the C100 offer RAW. That plus the ergonomics it already has would make it an ideal camera to own for me and I suspect many others. I could live without 4K and 60 fps as a trade-off to keep it in the $5,500 - $6,000 range.

The 5D Mk III with raw, as you mentioned, would probably sell even better. But after shooting with 5Ds and 7Ds for a while -- and having to trick them out with third-party rigs, cages, weights, and more -- I'm longing for a marriage of ergonomics and image quality at an affordable price point.

November 15, 2013 at 11:01AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

8
Reply
Shawn

Just get a C100. Unless your making feature films or are for whatever reason allergic to a Camera thats easy to shoot with. :) I played the what if game and if only game for ages until I finally bought the C100 and am so happy now. If it had RAW then bonus, but I would never use it.

November 15, 2013 at 12:52PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

Hi Claire,

I'm curious why that disclaimer is so common for the C100: "unless you're [sic] making feature films". I'm honestly confused by that since if you pair the C100 with a Ninja2 you get a 220Mb, 10-bit 4-2-2 image that's a low-light monster with fantastic ergonomics, amazing battery life, etc., etc.

Every time I read about how the C100 isn't a feature film camera, I think about what someone like John Sayles, Kevin Smith, or heck even Lena Dunham could do with that camera. As much as I love what Blackmagic is doing, the C100 is the camera I'm saving up for.

November 15, 2013 at 1:34PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

6
Reply
Robert

I've thought the same thing. I have never understood why the C100 is constantly relegated to videography.

November 15, 2013 at 4:49PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Marc B

Its an extremely robust camera, but in my opinion wrongly marketed as a cinema camera. In terms of image quality it simply does not hold up nor render a cinematic look as well as Sony F5, F55, any RED, alexa, hell even BM's offerings. Of course this is very subjective

November 15, 2013 at 6:00PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
carlos

Ive used it for a movie this month. Not relegating it at all. But I was talking hollywood. I DIT with RED EPIC and ARRI ALEXA. There is a difference between the C100 and those cameras :).

Not saying you can't make a movie with the C100. You could easily but the target market is the video side and in the controlled environment market aka studio, you have more cameras to choose from.

But for doco work i don't see why you would choose much else.

November 16, 2013 at 6:27AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

HDMI is not a fail-safe, production-robust connection. Connect it a few hundred times, and you will not record 220Mbit 10-bit 4:2:2, if anything at all. That's why they invented SDI.

November 17, 2013 at 6:13PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

8
Reply

I don't get Canon for this reason... Sony has had HD-SDI for all cameras the price of the C100 down to half that for several years now.

November 27, 2013 at 3:58AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Daniel Mimura

The bottom line is, most shooters do not need RAW or even Prores/DNxHD for recording formats. That's just the way the industry is right now - the majority of shooters do fine with h.264. If one needs these specialty formats, they will need to find them in more niche/professional cameras. Canon will continue to do what they do, and the 5d mkIV will sell just as nicely with new autofocus and expanded ISO or whatever. And people will continue to hack them, and so on and so on. Other companies will make the decision as to whether or not they want to dunk their feet int he professional market. Blackmagic has done a great job for price point, and I'd bet Panasonic will probably be the next with the rumors of the GH4 floating around.

November 15, 2013 at 11:04AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

4
Reply
alex

you see their in lies the problem, these are not speciality formats, they are industry standard formats meant for editing and grading. H.264 is an end delivery codec, in other words, it's not meant to be tampered with at all so it's a lot less flexible than say Prores or DNxHD. I use Raw for advertisement and it makes a huge difference to the image. When image matters most, 8 bit 4:2:0 is pretty weak next to Prores HQ 4:2:2 and certainly nowhere near close to 12 bit Raw images with 13 stops of dynamic Range. Again i'm talking about quality of image, not how good the camera is at being a camera.

November 15, 2013 at 10:43PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

... for a filmmaker perhaps. But don't forget, The majority of what Canon is making are PHOTO cameras that happen to have a pretty awesome video mode. First and foremost these are photography based devices. Canon will focus on features that make shooting photos on their camera seem more appealing to their customers, the photographers.

So in this case ProRes, RAW, and DNxHD are specialty formats.

Now for their Cinema line... yeah... those formats should be in there.

November 16, 2013 at 12:54AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

5
Reply

Yeah I agree with what you're saying, good point.

November 16, 2013 at 9:48AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Shaun Fontaine

Just a few things:
1) The 1DC has sold quite well. Probably more than Canon expected. Just within the 'famous' camera/blogger community i can think of three gents that own them (out of say, the top 10 sites). Here in LA they're not uncommon. It, unfortunately for us, has not been a failure (the 1DX on the hand.....) and the C300 and its codec camcorder friends have been massive hits which means that Canon's pricing strategy re video is unlikely to change
2) As mentioned by Emanio above, the video niche that is ok with workflows above the absolute basics that can't pay top dollar for their kit is tiny. Perhaps 10K in the US, out of a pro photographer/videographer market in the high hundred-thousands, and a pure amateur market in the millions. For 90% (higher?) of commercial paying video work RAW and overcrank are not basic requirements right now. If your company is tuned to that niche (hello BM/DigiBolex, all the cheaper rig guys) you may be able to make a living. If you're carrying 150 people just on your engineering team, you're going to need to shift product at a very solid markup to survive.
3) Joe you are correct that the C300 is the BMW 3 Series of the EOS line, from which they managed to create the 100/500. Even the numbers match. As do the prices :-)
4) Until the new low heat processors hit the market i don't think we'll see a RAW DSLR from a major manufacturer. Their stuff is engineered to far higher tolerances, which is why we pay more for it. The heat issue is a bitch, but will one day be conquered.

November 15, 2013 at 11:28AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
marklondon

One more thing - Dan is the man when it comes to getting this stuff. The piece on the new Kowa lenses is very exciting for the BM crowd.

November 15, 2013 at 11:29AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
marklondon

I dont know what you mean with overheating vs raw processing, i have an ML hacked 5d3 and thing is pretty stable.

November 15, 2013 at 3:45PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Premini

Canon and Nikon are acting like dinosaurs these days, while companies like Black Magic and Sony (and Fuji in the still world) are putting out truly exciting products. For Canon to charge $500 to unlock technology that is already on the sensor is supreme arrogance and shows what they think of their user base. This whole landscape is shifting dramatically and it will be interesting to see how things look a year from now. Which manufacturer will be first out of the gate with a camera that implements cfast 2.0? I know who I am betting on.

November 15, 2013 at 11:32AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

1
Reply

ARRI AMIRA has CFast technology. Did you bet on them?

November 15, 2013 at 12:55PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

6
Reply

That camera does not compete with these. I like how Arri did that, but I could definitely see the BMPC ver . 2.0 with that spec. That and a more powerful battery would address the major issues with that camera. Black Magic thinks like a computer company. Let's see what gets announced at NAB '14. Canon will spend all their money on marketing. Black Magic will blow everyone away.

November 15, 2013 at 2:58PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

6
Reply

I have $$$ worth of Black Magic products. They offer cheap solutions. They are not bad solutions, but their are some caveats.

As far as Canon spending all their budget on marketing... who cares, they have money to throw at everything... marketing, R&D, booth size and design... you name it. Black magic doesn't need to spend money on marketing because they price their products are next to nothing which gets them great press and a fan base. Im excited to see what Blackmagic do and how long they can compete at these prices etc.

Price is not as much of an issue for me next to quality and reliability of the product. If Black Magic products are prove to be solid enough for day to day beatings, then I will also invest some $$ in their cameras.

November 16, 2013 at 6:37AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

1
Reply

Arri Amira will not record raw.

November 16, 2013 at 2:30AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
EricV

Forgot that. Spits out one beautiful looking ProRes file tho :) ready to edit.

November 16, 2013 at 6:39AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

3
Reply

Nikon refused to put much focus on video and the reason is because they said that photography was and is their main focus and honestly can get made at them for that, its their business.

However canon has had a prosumer, consumer, and now have a proffesional eos cinema line, but blatantly refuses to enchance their product and basically admits that they dumb down the technology on lower end products, which in my opinion is a slap in the face to customers from all ranges of their products.

To be honest i see a falloff at somepoint and deminish of DSLR to a degree ala kodak, and honestly when and if that time comes where canon and NIKON are in the same perdicument as KODAK, i will not have one cent of sympathy for them because they both knowinly refused to react to an outcry of better products from their customers.

November 15, 2013 at 11:58AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

2
Reply
JAYE

In almost every post Canon has slapped someone in the face. Canon must have a sore hand. As far as blatantly refusing to enhance their cameras. The C100 is a pid upgrade to enhance auto focus and the guy is talking about how they are working on some new things. Are you upset because you want to buy a Canon but won't on principle. All corporate companies are the same. I can't afford to research and develop my own cameras so i shop around and find one i like. So i don't feel cheated.

November 15, 2013 at 1:00PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

The day DSLRs with video stop being produced all that will happen is we will all return to buying expensive cameras that do what we need them to do. People complain alot but I remember paying 8K USD for XHA1 plus 35mm adapters...today we pay half of that and get a singificantly better image with the filmic qualities we always craved and all of a sudden the issue is that "we dont have RAW and we always needed it!" whaaaaaaat? There is a camera for just about every taste right now, I don't understand why people in general don't just buy what works best for them. demanding things from Canon and Nikon is bit crazy.

November 15, 2013 at 2:52PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

7
Reply

For those who say we don't need RAW DSLR why not have the option? Someone (ML) is going to end up hacking it anyway. I wouldn't consider independent a niche market. Look at the Black Magic and other affordable options. Canon should maintain Pro, Amateur, and Consumer options.

November 15, 2013 at 12:52PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Madara

If they can't offer a stable and correct implementation then they risk product malfunction and mass law suits. If the price of the C500 was less, which does RAW with a recorder then no one would be complaining.

November 15, 2013 at 1:01PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

7
Reply

If canon wants a "Pro" and "consumer" line, they first have to make a pro camera. I kind of feel like there holding all of their cameras back, they don't really have a camera which has all the features. Sony has the F65 which is expensive but includes all of the features and they slowly water down their cameras based on price, but Canon's Flagship model is the C500. I think they just need to redesign the cinema line to have more cinema features like RAW.

November 15, 2013 at 1:13PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

6
Reply

I am a pro and I own a C300 and a C100, and shoot weekly with these cameras. I would never use raw on any of the stuff that I shoot. The codecs in these cameras are robust and work well for my line of work, which is short stories for the web. Usually in a documentary manner. It is lovely to be able to shoot all day on just a bunch of cards. Get back to the office in the late afternoon. Backup cards and home for dinner! That wont happen with raw, then you have to have a DIT with you all the friggin time or you will be home in the middle of the night after backing data.

November 15, 2013 at 2:32PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Daniel

They should just start calling them the "Pro" and "Creative" lines. The "Pro" line can just have boring, yet robust, codecs for people who do day-to-day work. And the "Creative" line can be for cinematic, experimental, music video, ect productions and include high-bit rate and/or RAW options. Price them bout the same and be done with it. Although, it is still pretty dumb... because the modern processors in these things can easily handle all the codec options in one model.

November 15, 2013 at 4:30PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
bwhitz

So the $14,000 C300 is "lower end" in their minds?

November 15, 2013 at 1:49PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

2
Reply

Lower than the C500, yes.

November 15, 2013 at 2:39PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

4
Reply

It's the second most expensive camera in their line up though. Not exactly "lower end"...even in their own product line.

November 17, 2013 at 2:49AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

It's low if your uncle or dad gets you into the Hollywood-unions and you can do "real" jobs. That's what everyone keeps telling me...

November 15, 2013 at 4:33PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
bwhitz

Years ago I called Canon tech support from a number I found on their website. I asked them if they took suggestions. I was told yes, so I said this, more or less: Ok, so you now have cameras that show live video on the back of the camera on the lcd, to use as a focus or composition aid, so you don't have to be looking in the viewfinder to see what is going on. Since the video signal goes to the lcd screen, what if you somehow could record that same video feed. Then you could use all the cool Canon lenses, ones that are not available in the tiny sensors of the XHA1 and earlier video cameras.

So it happened. I would assume some engineer figured out previously that might be possible, when the circuitry and memory card capacity and speed became higher enough. I recently participated in an entrepreneurial program, we are promoting something called 3D magnetic memory. The patent claims a storage capacity of 100 terabytes in a square inch. So time and technology march forward, consumers want more and more, and the manufacturers try to make it happen.

I think raw will happen, and I think it will happen on cell phone video.

November 15, 2013 at 2:05PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

8
Reply
Larry Vaughn

Are you sure it wasn't Nikon you called because it was Nikon that invented video on a DSLR and Canon then copied them a year later.

November 15, 2013 at 6:24PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

Yes I'm sure.

November 16, 2013 at 12:40PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Larry Vaughn

"Onda also mentions that the Dual Pixel AF which was recently announced, is already a part of the sensor (C100), and just needs to be enabled and the sensor tweaked for performance."

If it's part of the existing sensor, why is Canon charging $500 for it? Sounds like a firmware update to me.

November 15, 2013 at 2:49PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Larry Vaughn

Actually if you have a PAL Canon xf-300/305 camcorder and want it to also be an NTSC camcorder, you have to pay Canon $500 to unlock that feature.

November 15, 2013 at 4:18PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

3
Reply
Larry Vaughn

It needs a hardware tweak apparently to get the AF pixels operating correctly.

November 16, 2013 at 1:39AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

2
Reply
avatar
Joe Marine
Camera Department

Anyone interested in 3D magnetic memory licensing can contact me for more info. lancecharles(AT)gmail.com

November 15, 2013 at 2:51PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Larry Vaughn

I started with a Canon 7D but get rid of it for the Sony FS100 and NEX 5n. Never going back to Canon. My next camera will probably be Blackmagic if they can get their frame rates up. Need that slow motion for the type of work I do.

November 15, 2013 at 3:13PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

4
Reply

Side note, NFS please at ajax comments to this site so the page doesn't reload when watching/listening to video

November 15, 2013 at 3:14PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

*add

November 15, 2013 at 3:14PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

6
Reply

I think Onda is correct up to a point - in the sub-$1K market, Raw is too much. The key there is improved software and processing power that would eliminate moire and allow to higher frame rate. C-log @50Mbps (or, preferably, All-I) would be sufficient for 95% of their customer base. Just because someone like BMD makes an inexpensive Raw camera (though, some complain that even Pro-Res eats up too much space) doesn't mean that Canon should duplicate the efforts of a non-stills product.
.
What's more interesting is what they do with 7D, 5D, C 100/300 and 1D C replacements. As the late Steve Jobs sad, if you don't cannibalize your products, someone else will do it for you. 7D and up to C 100 should have, at least, the 2.5K resolution and 10-bit color gamut. C 300 and up should have, at least, internal compressed 4K recording and external Raw. And, considering the upcoming release of Sony Z-100 4K camcorder that has XAVC at 600 Mbps, they should also be 30% cheaper per unit compared to where they are priced right now. Plus, Canon should also bundle decent editing/coloring software and provide coupons for the outboard recorders such as Atomos, AJA and Convergent Design.

November 15, 2013 at 6:38PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
DLD

My thinking, or lack there of it, is Canon is first and foremost a lens company. I would guess their camera body sales are a small percentage of their overall sales. I agree with Joe, it's the so called accident of adding video to the 5DMarkII that catapulted Canon to the top. I mean if you really look back at the launch of the 5DM2, Canon basically came out from the bushes and literally side-swiped the entire video production industry. If that had never happened, Canon would not have the success they've had thus far. Are they, Canon, listening to their customers, that's a tough one to answer, my take is, yes, they're listening, but not to the majority of the market customers, they're listening to the higher end users. Which, isn't to say that's a bad thing, but it is what it is.
I'm waiting for the announcement that Apple is entering a professional video camera to their line of products. Yeah, that may seem like a ridiculous thought, but i think Apple has the capability of producing a video acquisition product like no other. What do you think about that? Could Apple pull that off? Would you like to see Apple enter that arena?

November 15, 2013 at 9:49PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

1
Reply
Steve M.

Apple would have to work with an existing camera manufacturer. Having said that, outside of the four major players (Canon, Nikon, Sony, Panasonic) who are unlikely to compete against itself in all aspects, Apple should be able to find a dance partner (Fuji, Samsung, Pentax, Olympus, Mamiya, Phase One, Grass Valley) for their R&D.
.
BTW, Canon probably sells around 6 million cameras globally, as the first decade of the 21st century has been bery, bery good for them (is it OK to do the Chico Esquela accent here?).

November 15, 2013 at 11:27PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
DLD

what about a 4k raw iPhone

November 16, 2013 at 6:52AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

7
Reply
DIO

Canon doesn't think cheap cameras should have RAW.

November 15, 2013 at 10:43PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
au8ust

That's ok, in a year or two they'll announcing their next-gen DSL's will be shooting RAW; It's just a waiting game.

November 15, 2013 at 11:34PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

7
Reply
Bolex16

that's why i've been ignoring their mk lll firmware updates recently. they BS'd us on the clean hdmi out for six months ... and then put in that tweak that bricked out third party batteries. i'm dead sure they're discussing ways to sneak a piece of ML-crippling code in one of the firmware 'updates' sooner or later.

November 15, 2013 at 10:58PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
sjk

By the way, I was going through the IBEE YouTube videos and I swear I saw a working prototype of Black Magic 4K Production Camera somewhere in the shot. Unfortunately, the announcers speak only in Japanese - with a few English words interspersed, as required by nomenclature. So, if there are any Japanese speakers amongst the NFS posters, head over to [ http://www.youtube.com/user/InterBEETV/videos ] and help us along.

November 16, 2013 at 3:58AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
DLD

depending on budget I like the 5d mark III and c300

but for higher budgets kodak and arri lt..

November 16, 2013 at 4:50AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
DIO

In addition to the raw issue, with huge numbers of requests from Canon filmmakers for more slow motion options, Canon is extremely slow with adding higher frame rates to the lower end cameras. It baffles me that I can get higher frame rate options on my $400 GoPro 3 than on the $3000 5D MKIII not to mention those new iPhones.... COME ON CANON, JUST DO IT! Slow motion is a very sexy option for your image making users and you are denying us a feature you are fully capable of adding thus, damaging your valuable Brand Image as a Cinema company. We want to shoot high frame rates on our expensive Canon lenses. Conversely I wish GoPro would develop a camera with interchangeable lenses!

November 16, 2013 at 11:59AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
rob

I wish GoPro would use the guts of their camera to make a line of cameras with changeable lenses too. I've called them about it twice. The tech guys I talked too seemed to think it was a good idea, and if they got enough requests for it they'd probably do it. If you call them would you request it would have 4K SDI, and Thunderbolt on it, besides just having HDMI?

November 17, 2013 at 4:35PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

6
Reply
Gene

I agree. Although this is an awesome interview by Dan Chung (thanks, Dan!), we surely missed the opportunity to talk to the-guy-in-charge about higher frame rates in Canon cameras. From what I've been told, the image processor in the C300 (basically the same as their XF-line) is incapable of handling higher framerates. So we'll have to wait for a C300 II, or whatever the name of the next line will be.

A fullframe C-line camera is an interesting thought, however...

November 17, 2013 at 5:17PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

They can always double up on processors, whose wholesale cost is fairly negligible. That big C-body should be able to withstand the extra heat generation fairly easily.

November 17, 2013 at 8:11PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
DLD

I've worked on 5 WalMart commercials this year as a field sound mixer. The dop was using his own C-300. I also worked on a nationally broadcast production recently, the camera was a C-300 rented from VER. So someone likes it.

November 16, 2013 at 12:36PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

1
Reply
Larry Vaughn

This is exactly the kind of mentality that makes me just want to abandon Canon as a camera-maker... so what if it's a hassle in workflow?! And crippling the videos to compressed 8 bit is not? Heck, oh, I don't know... why should we even bother to keep our advantage in the market we "accidentally" created...

And I find real issue with the whole notion that they didn't expect a real video mode on a full frame dslr to be a selling point... so... they weren't aware of the whole 35mm adapter-industry that was flourishing for a few years? The fact that Shallow DoF was the biggest buzzword in videography since miniDV? That is just sloppy marketplace research... and even if we grant them this. Why not POUNCE on this oppurtunity to really own the whole market from the get-go?! No, instead we have had to literally drag them, kicking and screaming against their own will as they begrudgingly squeezed out firmware updates, enabling the meagerest of feature-set. Almost going "Fine? Happy now? Now go away! Your money is bothering us!" with each and every release...

Then they released the C-line... and while I have considered getting one, the ones that can do 24p is just to damned expensive for what I get today.

Yes, I grant that the pro-line of Canons products are robust work-horses. I'm not sure what I'd have to do to make my 7d collapse... but physical sturdiness is one thing. Taking advantage of the power available in these beasts is something quite else. Why else would all of us resort to Hacking and reverse-engineering to make us feel we are actually getting what we paid for... If they handled this HDSLR revolution correctly then the whole Magic Lantern project wouldn't even be needed.

I'm sorry for the ranting... but if they had some sense people would literally stand in long lines screaming SHUT UP AND TAKE OUR MONEY!!!

November 16, 2013 at 2:00PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

7
Reply

Johan, you may have a chance to dust off your old DOF adapters for the new Sony Z-100 4K camcorders (that is, unless, they update FS-100 into a 4K cam with similar specs). Pro features for $5,500 (in the US, probably the same in Euros).

November 16, 2013 at 4:25PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
DLD

Well it's Canon, no matter whether other company may have better product or not, but for most people Canon is a well recognized brand, and with huge legion of royal supporters that help marketing Canon cameras to new people

If you are on fb group a lot of them will say even 550d is way better than Blackmagic

November 16, 2013 at 4:14PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Nelson

The C100/C300 are the perfect cameras for right now. They employ the best execution and usability for making broadcast ready stuff you could ask for. They're priced for people who will pay for the reliability and usability of them, not necessarily just the performance. Moreover Canon is covering their asses and not employing any features or technology they don't believe is 100% reliable. They'd rather cripple a camera than release something unreliable. For most people who aren't working with their cameras every day, and would lose out a ton if they ran into reliability problems, these cameras seem way over priced and under performing. However Canon knows that people out there would pay 2000 bucks more for a camera they can count on. As far as film making goes, they might not be the ideal choice, but the broadcast/documentary segment that will pay for it is way bigger than the indie movie segment.

November 16, 2013 at 8:00PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
IAN

I think Canon is right up where it should be (kind of). Sure, it's not cheap to buy a c100/300, but it's not that expensive when you think some years ago a sony z1 or more recently EX1 would cost you more than the c100 does now.

Cameras like the Blackmagic and dslr's with Magic Lantern are great, but they don't seem very reliable, plus you still need a ton of external accessories which is a pain in the a**.
And in my humble opinion raw is great, but it's not the best way to shoot. I'd rather have good compression than spend my paycheck on hard drives and burn my brain with workflow issues.

I think all they need to is stop protecting their high end stuff and just give us some slow motion at 1080 and better internal codec like 10bit 422 on the cinema cameras. Even the c100 should have these standards. Sony already has them, but come on....... we love that canon color science.

November 17, 2013 at 5:56AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

It's not like he's from Panasonic or anything.

November 17, 2013 at 4:30PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

9
Reply
Gene

It baffles me that people are still standing around asking and waiting on Canon to give them this, that or something else. A C300 is $14K and a C500 is $23K. I paid $16,5K for my Sony F5 and I'm shooting spectacularly beautiful 120FPS, 1080p footage with 13+ stops of latitude to a 10bit, 4:2:2, 400mb/s codec internally! Did you get that? Internally! The image is creamy smooth. And it's capable of 60FPS,,16bit raw 4K and 240FPS, 16bit 2K. Not to mention several other industry standard codecs and, with some inexpensive adapters, it'll take practically any lens on the planet.

What are you guys holding on to?

November 17, 2013 at 10:14PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

Yeah but, Sony knows video.

Do you use anything Panasonic?

November 18, 2013 at 12:35AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

8
Reply
Gene

It's not so much they know about video but they have their @ss in fire thanks to Red and Canon (to mention the few). But UNLIKE many others, Sony just moved fast. By creating the F5 and F55 they rocked the boat so much that even Arri now _has_ to move by proposing the Amira. In the past, Sony has never followed a planned firmware upgrade path, UNLIKE what they are doing now for the F5 and F55. They are even adding new (unexpected) features. I don't like Sony and hated them, and they are still smart and nasty enough (commercially) to fix the price of a _naked_ F5 close to the price of a full F3. But..
As of me, I got a C100 and would never pay 3 times its price for the C300 even though the C100 has been crippled. Simply because the C300 does not worth its price (16K for 8 bits color depth! A joke!). I'm saving money for buying a full F5. And I will get everything: 180 fps, raw _if_ and _when_ I want, 10 bits, etc.

November 18, 2013 at 4:57AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Michel_M

Gene, not sure I understand your comment.
"Yeah but, Sony knows video."
Do you mean by that... Canon doesn't know video?

I don't use any Panasonic stuff. I like Panasonic but, don't have any of it.

November 18, 2013 at 10:16PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

2
Reply

If you're a documentary filmmaker all you need is a C100. It's much cheaper than the C300 and the F5. It's easy to use and have good ergonomics.

November 18, 2013 at 8:29AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Martin

I am very genuinly considering selling my epic for an F5 for the reasons stated above.....

November 21, 2013 at 5:23PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
Timur Civan

This is just nonsense from Canon, desperate to justify the incredibly poor specifications of their cameras.

Canon completely ignores:
- The strength of their competition. See dixter's comments on the F5 above. The Blackmagic pocket camera records raw to SD cards, is tiny and costs less than $1k, the cost of DaVinci Resolve that is bundled with it.
- The speed and capacity of modem SD and CF cards. The Blackmagic pocket camera can record 12bit lossless compressed HD to SD cards. With Magic Lantern, 14bit uncompressed raw can be recorded to CF cards in Canon's own cameras.
- The low cost, high speed and large capacity of storage. 4tb spinning disks can be had for $150. Incredibly fast SSDs are affordable and can be used to house media for a current project.
- The power of modern desktop computers and video cards. Consumer graphics cards costing a few hundred dollars deliver multiple teraflops of compute performance - more than the fastest super computer on the planet at the turn of the millennium.
- The capability of today's software. Blackmagic's DaVinci Resolve and Adobe Premier can both work with Cinema DNG files in real time.

But, yes, apart from all that, capturing in 24Mbps h.264 1080p is as good a workflow for 2014 as it was for 2004.

November 18, 2013 at 2:33PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply
TiCa

Canon is fast becoming the Apple of cameras. They're riding on their name and brand following... and not much more.

Sooner or later they'll get in a financial pickle like Sony and HAVE to start responding to customer demands. They cannot continue to think like they do (as made abundantly clear by that interview) and also threaten legal action against industrious hackers able to de-gimp some of their firmware and provide some features that people want and need.

November 21, 2013 at 5:18PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

1
Reply
Dan H

I watched the whole interview but must admit it was very painful. Just think where Canon might be today if they had someone as knowledgeable, energetic and articulate as Chung (the interviewer). Knowing who is at the helm of EOS video I actually have LESS confidence in the future of Canon Video.

November 21, 2013 at 7:15PM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

must +1 again what Rob said. I personally could live without Raw, but lack of high frame rate is becoming a major deal breaker for planning my future relationship with Canon.
something tells me though, and without knowing for a fact, that us filmmakers and professional shooters are not a significant market for Canon. either that, or somebody up there is making everything they can to sabotage their business.. which is unlikely.

November 22, 2013 at 9:50AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

0
Reply

I'm wondering why, when even GoPro and iPhones can over crank, why the C300 is limited to 60fps. The Sony fs700 over cranks by 300fps. Can't the C300 get at least 120 like the iPhone? Please??

November 23, 2013 at 12:39AM, Edited September 4, 11:21AM

4
Reply

Now that card readers have caught up with what it takes to pump out 2k raw video I think canon has another great window to do something revolutionary. Like you said there are a ton of people who would pay $4,200 - $5,200 for a DSLR similar to the 5d MarkIII with 2k raw video added.

The market is there, they just have to be willing to feed it.

November 13, 2014 at 5:12PM, Edited November 13, 5:12PM

0
Reply
avatar
Walter Wallace
Spokesperson/Entrepreneur
935