January 31, 2015

Canon's Only 4K DSLR, the 1D C, is Getting a $4,000 Price Drop

While other companies are introducing budget 4K DSLRs, Canon still has just one, and it's not cheap. Though the 1D C is now a few years old, it's still been retailing for $12,000, a hefty price just for 4K capabilities (the 1D X does basically everything else it can do except 4K). On Sunday, February 1st, its price is going to drop by a massive $4K, and it will now retail for $8,000.

If you've missed some of the great stuff shot with the camera, here's The Ticket, shot by Shane Hurlbut:

And check out Philip Bloom's review if you haven't:

The 1D C is a great camera for gimbal rigs, and it's also been used extensively as a crash cam. As we've said before, this doesn't necessarily mean that a new model is imminent, but it is something that Canon will do when they are trying to get rid of old stock. At this price, the 1D C makes way more sense than it ever did for most people at $12,000 (or even more). Considering the 4K recording in MJPEG takes up a ton of space, it was a bit more difficult to get big CF cards at affordable prices. Now that these cards have come down in price, it's more realistic using this on projects when you're only recording in 4K. 

It still has the limits of every other DSLR, but for people who want a small 4K camera with nice image quality, or a 4K camera with good low light capabilities to complement a larger 4K camera, the 1D C's new $8K price might actually work for your budget (though it's still out of the range of most people for what it can do).      

Your Comment

29 Comments

I'll get the usual all out of the way: Psh, no RAW, 4K slow-mo, XLR inputs, LUT support, and 4K is so overkill, plus 6K is where everything's headed, this camera's overpriced because GH4, A7s, F7, Canon sucks and go check out my new film!

February 1, 2015 at 12:30AM

0
Reply
Cassidy Hilton
Freelancer
215

So for real it doesn't shoot RAW? I don't know jack about this camera.

February 1, 2015 at 7:26AM

0
Reply
avatar
Geoffrey Young Haney
writer & director
93

Your new 'film' makes my eyes go funny, go check out a tripod for your hobby, dickhead.

February 1, 2015 at 2:39PM

0
Reply

HA! Well said

February 1, 2015 at 11:14PM

1
Reply

I'm confused. Are you saying his film looks handheld? Are we talking about the same film that is posted on his portfolio page?

February 2, 2015 at 5:31AM

5
Reply

^troll.

February 2, 2015 at 2:45PM

0
Reply
avatar
Torsten Pearson
Writer-Director-Editor
388

Have you seen The Ticket's credit list??? You can invade Europe with that army!

February 1, 2015 at 1:12AM

17
Reply
avatar
Alex Zakrividoroga
Director
3880

I couldn't get past the first 30 seconds

February 1, 2015 at 6:25AM

0
Reply
matt
908

It's really good.

February 2, 2015 at 3:06PM

0
Reply
avatar
Torsten Pearson
Writer-Director-Editor
388

Good luck canon for that price drop of a overly priced camera, Competition will be far ahead of you, FS7 is 8k, and 1dc is not even near to that. Please wake up its morning in 2015, we are not in 2012.

February 1, 2015 at 1:20AM

8
Reply
avatar
Aurelien Brentraus
Director/Cinematographer
182

Let me see....since I don't shoot features every day......do I want to spend $8000 on a piece of equipment that's going to sit on a shelf at least 50% of the time and has many of the shortcomings mentioned by other comments. Or do I want to spend $5200 to rent a Red Epic Dragon kit with three Canon Cine lenses for a 3 week maybe once a year feature shoot. Someone........help me decide!

February 1, 2015 at 6:20AM, Edited February 1, 6:20AM

8
Reply
avatar
Jerry Roe
Indie filmmaker
1012

Rent. In hollywood the DP's do not own anything. Buy if you want to play in your free time.

February 1, 2015 at 10:00PM

3
Reply
luc bees
140

AMEN. THIS GUY IS A FUCKING GENIUS!

February 2, 2015 at 12:01AM

0
Reply
avatar
Gordon Robert
Blog Reader Posing as an Important Filmmaker
228

Thanks Gordon.......for giving me closure.

February 2, 2015 at 6:58AM

4
Reply
avatar
Jerry Roe
Indie filmmaker
1012

Buy an inexpensive camera and practice getting great shots with it. If you can do stellar work with a cheap piece of gear, imagine how outstanding you will be when you rent the good stuff for your feature work.

February 8, 2015 at 12:53AM

15
Reply
Ryan Gudmunson
Recreational Filmmaker
603

The naysayers overlook the point that the 1DC is also a phenomenal stills camera on par with the 1DX ($6000) and much stronger than a GH4 for example. I think of the 1DC more as a stills camera with a 4K add-on than as a dedicated video camera. If you're work is pure video, get an FS7, C300, whatever else floats your boat. The 1DC is a niche product that fulfills the requirements of a very particular few and in that context the price makes much more sense.

February 1, 2015 at 2:04PM

10
Reply

Naw, i'd rather just go with a year of Red rentals over the course of a year then pay for a 1DC upfront. I'm sorry but, if you don't realize that this drop in price doesn't have liquidate written all over it then you've probably never heard of NAB.

February 2, 2015 at 12:00AM, Edited February 2, 12:00AM

0
Reply
avatar
Gordon Robert
Blog Reader Posing as an Important Filmmaker
228

it's so easy to post negative comment, I think the harder people bash, the greater the chance they never work with the gear, but only know its specs.

the 1DC is not the best filmcamera, it's a photo camera with video options, so all comparisons with other filmcamera's is irrelevant.

It's an extremely good stills camera with a 4K film option with a lot of pro's and cons,
not more, not less.

worth the money if you're a photographer, it does the same trick as the 1Dx plus 4k film (with limitations, but nevertheless).

February 1, 2015 at 4:30PM, Edited February 1, 4:30PM

11
Reply

As a negative voice here on Nofilmschool I have to say Canon's cinema line is about as compelling as a V Renée article. In other word's it's not worth the money you pay for it.

PS: I have worked with all of Canon's C gear and I hate that people choose
"picture profiles" over dynamic range and bit depth. Everyone who spent money on Canon C cameras are a lot less profitable then if they would of just stuck with a hacked 5d3. I mean I guess the C500 is a step in the right direction but, at the price to feature set ratio i'd rather just go with Red's workflow.

February 1, 2015 at 11:57PM

0
Reply
avatar
Gordon Robert
Blog Reader Posing as an Important Filmmaker
228

"... about as compelling as a V Renée article."

Ouch.

February 2, 2015 at 12:42PM

0
Reply
avatar
Alan Dembek
Camera Assistant
252

Let's see... shall I buy a 1DC or FS7.... Better yet, a 1DC or 4 a7s's!! Canon is so far behind now it's starting to get outta control. The 1DC should be $3,499-$3,999. Even with the new price drop it's still overpriced by at least $4k.

February 2, 2015 at 3:53PM, Edited February 2, 3:53PM

0
Reply
avatar
Kaster Troy
Director, DP, Editor
1027

Name me a full-frame stills camera that does 14fps and all the other things a 1DX does that goes for $3499-3999...they don't exist.

I'd say this is finally priced where it should have started. 1DX goes for $5999, 1DC goes as a 4k upgrade at $7999. And then obviously the street price of the 1DC would creep lower. It's serving a small niche (sports/wildlife photogs who also have to shoot high-res video), but, its a niche that sees the stills performance at $6k as a bargain, and the 4k as a nice bonus

February 4, 2015 at 8:58AM

0
Reply

This isn't worth 8k as a stills camera and it certainly isn't worth 8k as a video camera. Your def a Canon fanboy. It's an overpriced waste of money. This camera doesn't even have focus peaking lol. So the obvious is, do you waste your money on this by spending 8k or do you spend half that and get an a7s with Shogun? Pretty easy answer there.

February 5, 2015 at 2:34PM

2
Reply
avatar
Kaster Troy
Director, DP, Editor
1027

wouldn't it be cheaper and make more sense to get a C100 ? It's 4k downconverted to 1080p which is what you're going to do anyway when you render the footage.
Unless you need the stills.

February 3, 2015 at 1:41AM

0
Reply
avatar
Vincent Gortho
none
815

Nar, c100 is soft as butter and terrible to push around in post, the 1dc produces a much nice image in my opinion.

February 3, 2015 at 8:33PM

6
Reply
matt
908

Although I wouldn't buy a 1dc unless is were around $3-4k price point.
And media for this camera is pretty insane. You absolutely burn through CF cards and they need to be fast/expensive ones to shoot 4k.

February 3, 2015 at 8:36PM

0
Reply
matt
908

Not to call you a liar Matt, everyone is of course entitled to their own opinions & has had their own experiences, but calling c100 soft flies in the face of conventional wisdom. I've always had the impression that c100 has as sharp and detailed image as any other sub $20,000 camera. I'd love to hear more, as I have been thinking of moving to a c100 as the price has dropped.

(Yes, that c100 is tough in post has been well documented.)

February 3, 2015 at 8:41PM

0
Reply

C100 is nice and sharp, its a great camera with killer ergonomics and is very user friendly, but right now there are such better cameras on the market especially for the price. The Sony FS100 wipes the floor with the C100 and its only $2400 now. You get great in cam slow motion which the c100 doesn't have and you can go up to 60fps in 1080 which the c100 certainly doesn't have either.

February 5, 2015 at 2:40PM, Edited February 5, 2:40PM

9
Reply
avatar
Kaster Troy
Director, DP, Editor
1027

We were matching blackmagic pocket and c100 on a recent shoot and blackmagic files had much better sharpness and detail. I also don't really like the ergonomics of the c100 although all the marketing goes in about it. It's so top heavy and the viewfinder is useless. Honestly I'd prefer to shoot on a 5dmkiii.

February 5, 2015 at 5:22PM

2
Reply
matt
908