August 23, 2015 at 3:48PM, Edited August 26, 8:45AM

29

Dear Canon

C100 Mark I should be fazed out.
C100 Mark II should be the current price of a C100 Mark I.
C300 Mark I should be the current price of a C100 Mark II
C300 Mark II should be the current price of C300 Mark I.

Then people would feel like you're actually competing in the market rather than ignoring it. See: Sony fs7, Blackmagic Ursa 4.6k, Panasonic Gh4 or af101, etc.

26 Comments

Couldn't agree more, but the c300 mk2 at $6,500 is a bit much to ask, everything else is super reasonable though and I think canon would sell so much more if they were to do this.

August 24, 2015 at 10:20PM

0
Reply

I don't agree with you.

August 26, 2015 at 11:43PM

0
Reply
avatar
Better Videography
creative director
1

As soon as there is realistic competition to their pricing Canon will adjust their pricing to match, but right now there's not many cameras that are as simple to operate and will run all day on just a few batteries.

Right now I am curious to see if the Blackmagic Ursa Mini will have any impact on this market segment.

August 25, 2015 at 7:58AM, Edited August 25, 7:59AM

2
Reply
Guy McLoughlin
Video Producer
32544

I think you are right. Canon will charge as much as they can get away with. They are a business after all. It will be cameras like the Ursa Mini (and others) that will determine Canon's pricing strategy.

August 26, 2015 at 5:35AM

26
Reply
avatar
Julian Richards
Film Warlord
968

The FS7 is destroying them at the moment. Best camera I've ever owned.

August 26, 2015 at 7:35AM

2
Reply
avatar
Devin Bousquet
Director-DP-Editor
89

I will never buy Canon for shooting again. They don't care about customers enough imo.

August 25, 2015 at 11:53AM

0
Reply
Andy Tokarski
Director, Editor, Colorist
1275

I agree with this general concept very much!!! If a c100 mkII was cheaper, it's highly likely that would be the camera of choice for my next purchase.
I mean, we'll wait 'til there is more footage and experience, but so far the URSA Mini seems like a camera that will kill everything. I know specs are only specs, but dear LORD it has some good specs!!!!!
Also, no output to 10bit on the c100/300 is kind of frustrating...I can do w/out 4k but at least hook us up with 10bit color space externally if anything.

August 25, 2015 at 6:32PM

0
Reply
avatar
Ben Meredith
Cinematographer/Filmmaker
949

What am I missing about the Ursa mini? 4.6k images look fantastic - but why would this camera be a competitor to the fs7 or even a c100? I get it if you are shooting in very controlled environments but.... For corporate video or run and gun Blackmagic seems like the last choice i would make.

I own a bmpcc. It sits on the shelf because my GH2 is much easier to use. But now that's on the shelf and the c100 is my main cam. Why does black magic make me hit a button 15 times to change the white balance or the ISO?

We know the max ISO on the Ursa mini will be 1600. That pretty much sucks for me. And - who would want the 4k version? Same sensor as the production cam at 12 stops of dynamic range? I'm not even close to interested. Just stick with the C100 with built in nd's, great low light, super easy to shoot with, fantastic image quality etc.

The 4.6k will be the same price as the fs7 basically - why on earth would I buy the Ursa for what I do?

I want to love this camera. But I need some help understanding how people
Will actually use it and why they are raving about it.

August 26, 2015 at 9:08AM, Edited August 26, 9:08AM

0
Reply
Lane McCall
Producer/Director
88

This.. exactly this..

And it's because people don't understand what the Canon has made with the Cinema cameras.. They are built for documentaries and such.

The Blackmagic Cameras (all of them, also the Ursa Mini) is CINEMA cameras.. they are built for movie making.

I shoot with the BMCC 2.5K all the time, because i like the look it produces.. but i cannot complain about it not being very good a documentaries, because it's not bulit for it.. If you use it for Documentaries, then you have to accept the "lack of documentary functonality".

I will be buying the new Ursa Mini because i love the look it produces, but i will also accept the "lack of documentary functonality" because it's not made for this work. And as such, i will have to worker harder (which i will gladly do).

Also... i don't get people that don't understand the ISO on the Blackmagic cameras.. when you ajust the ISO in the Blackmagic Cameras, you don't change the ISO.. you change the gamma. The camera use the same voltage(iso gain) all times. It's the exact same analog gain all the time. Native ISO is 800.. so when you turn it to 1600 ISO, then you just adjust the gamma digitaly (as you would in post anyway). Also.. if you shoot ISO 400, it means you just pushed it one stop down - just as you would in post. Which means.. don't bother doing it out on a shoot, because you can do it when you get home. At the computer you can fine tune it much more and you have not affected the image in any bad way.

This explanation is also why when shooting RAW the ISO does nothing. In ProRes the CPU that compresses the image, bakes in a digital push/pull on the exposure.

And why have blackmagic made it only to have iso 800 (in reality)? Because it requrires much less sensor optimization and testing, and you can optimize the image, which is much easier when you only have one voltage setting (gain) on the sensor. They have done this to 1) cut costs, 2) it's designed as a cinema camera, so lighting has to be done anyway.

Anyways thats my 2 cents.

Have a nice day! :)

August 26, 2015 at 9:33AM

3
Reply

Thank you

August 26, 2015 at 11:50AM, Edited August 26, 11:50AM

0
Reply

Thanks Dennis! Great answer.

I have completely understood that blackmagic has been making cinema cameras - it's just that the majority of shooters I know dont shoot cinema (or even in that way) and yet they have been so excited for the camera! I just couldn't understand why!

It's nice to hear you say you work harder for your images, because that has been my experience. however, In my world clients don't care enough for me to need to work harder and I'm generally more pressed for time than I would ideally care to be.

I honestly didn't know that about the ISO in prores eventhough I always stick to native ISO with my bmpcc. But, you sound like the kind of user Blackmagic is aiming for. Maybe someday I will be. :)
Best.

August 26, 2015 at 11:08PM, Edited August 26, 11:18PM

4
Reply
Lane McCall
Producer/Director
88

In what world is the fs7 basically the same price as the ursa ini 4.6? The body alone is $3k more…

August 26, 2015 at 9:35AM

22
Reply

Yeah, valid points, just depends on what you want to shoot. Personal choice. I just shot a whole wedding with the pocket camera and had no problems, it was awesome and turned out great. To each their own.
URSA Mini (on paper, the 4.6 sensor mainly, I agree the 4k sensor is not very good, I've used it and it needs light or turns to rubbish) is exciting to me for a few reasons. 4.6k if you want it, is a fun feature to have. Multiple flavors of prores is also nice for me. Anamorphic mode could prove usable to me in the near future. Global shutter and rolling shutter mode is nice. High frame rates is especially nice, higher than 60p. Screen and menu options will all be easier. Ability to shoot RAW is cool to have if you're doing a bigger project. And then...15 stops of range...wow. Like I said, ON PAPER lol. We'll see what actually comes out, but the people that have shot with it have said it does gain about 1 more stop in the highlights and one more in the shadows. That's pretty freaking impressive. All of that...for the price point...is pretty nuts. Only going to 1600 doesn't personally bother me. I use fast glass and 800 has been just fine. Anything more than that and I'm probably in a place too dark to get a good image anyway. BUT...that's just a personal thing for me. I definitely understand the advantages of having a cleaner image at 1600, 3200, 6400, etc.
Just depends on what you want to use I guess. URSA will match my pocket, too, which is nice.

August 26, 2015 at 12:56PM

1
Reply
avatar
Ben Meredith
Cinematographer/Filmmaker
949

Nice answer Ben. thanks.
Joe: ursa mini 4.6k body $5000
Viewfinder ,Tripod/shoulder mount & battery plate $2000
Extra CFast storage due to raw shooting - let's say $600
Total $7600
Fs7 body $8000

August 26, 2015 at 11:12PM

1
Reply
Lane McCall
Producer/Director
88

Could someone please tell me, regardless of the camera being convenient for documentary or film, if a C100 can cut it for a cinematic movie making image on the screen, or does the BM offer something special over the image of C100 ?

August 27, 2015 at 6:54PM

21
Reply
Saied M.
892

Depends on your taste. With the right lighting and set up, I've certainly seem wonderfully beautiful and cinematic images from the c100.

August 27, 2015 at 7:29PM, Edited August 27, 7:29PM

0
Reply
avatar
Ben Meredith
Cinematographer/Filmmaker
949

ISO 1600 is actually really good and usable on the BMCC 2.5k. Native sensitivity of 800 is really amazing. It's the same as Alexa. Even the Red Dragon is only a ISO 400 camera despite Red's claims. Seriously, ask any professional without skin in the game... going above ISO 400 on a Red is horrible.

August 28, 2015 at 1:31PM

0
Reply

I feel that the c100 mkii should cost what the c100 currently costs, i'm looking at upgrading now to a c100 because I cant afford the mk ii for an extra 2k with little enhancements and slightly improved image. not to mention still no affordable 4k or at least 1080p slo mo or even 60p 1080!!!!! canon needs to get their shit together

August 26, 2015 at 5:46AM, Edited August 26, 5:46AM

1
Reply
Derian Hartmann
Director of Photography | Cinematographer | Editor
103

It is remarkable that Canon has left their customers and acted in a passive way forward to the release of other brands, but do not think the DSLR market is dead for them. The canon has already mentioned officially that in no hurry to carry out launches and expects the product cycle is over, as opposed to companies launching equipment on the market more overt way, as blackmagic.

Remember that the Mark II 5D was launched in 2008, four years after it launched the 5D Mark III, it seems that 2016 will be released one Mark IV, we expect a significant improvement in specifications and has a cost per benefit that equate to competitors.

August 26, 2015 at 10:11AM

1
Reply
avatar
amadeu gomes
filmmaker
8

And Canon 1DC should be at the price of 1DX!

August 26, 2015 at 11:08AM

0
Reply
avatar
Heri Rakotomalala
DP/Camera, Studio owner, Associate Producer
361

I couldn't agree more with this.

August 26, 2015 at 1:07PM

22
Reply
avatar
Jack Klink
Director | DP
121

Dear Canon,

The community behind the Magic Lantern firmware upgrades for Canon's DSLR line shouldn't exist. Canon's DSLRs should simply have the functionality built-in that the Magic Lantern firmware upgrades provide. When a group organizes itself to provide an important service for your products that you won't provide yourself - related to functionality that many of your competitors provide in their equivalent products - you know you have an issue.

August 26, 2015 at 4:28PM

0
Reply

This is why I stopped using Canon and switched to Sony. Here's my full take on selling my C100, dumping the Cinema EOS line and buying an FS7: http://magnaluxpictures.com/home/2015/7/27/a-changing-of-the-guard

August 26, 2015 at 5:37PM

0
Reply
avatar
Adam Volerich
Director/DP
110

Screw Blackmagic. It's all about what the market wants. It's great for an indie film but that's about it. Buy a C300 and you can pay it off within 2-3 months if you work hard. The demand is that high. FS7 is nice but the name isn't out there enough yet. Professional cameras cost money, and it's no good whining about it. Yes, the C300mk2 is way overpriced but if the market goes that way invest the money and you'll never regret it.

August 26, 2015 at 8:20PM

0
Reply
Josh Ausley
Director of Photography
67

Look at market share. The original c100 sold well. The c300 sold like hotcakes. All these other companies lower their prices and pack extra features into their cameras in an attempt to cut into Canon's market share. (especially in the DSLR market. They sell more Rebels then everyone else's cameras combined) When they start to cut into Canon's market share, Canon will lower their prices. But people don't do that because Canon makes excellent equipment that always works that has great color reproduction (ask any high level DP, that's the most important thing, its why the Alexa is used more than Red) and when you are invested into the EOS ecosystem it makes leaving that much more difficult. As much as I'd like those prices, they won't happen unless people start buying vastly differently.

August 27, 2015 at 10:57PM, Edited August 27, 11:29PM

0
Reply
avatar
Michael Markham
Actor/Filmmaker
761

As a c100 Mk II owner I've got to say I couldn't be happier with the camera. It's a workhorse plain and simple. I've used it for web commercials, weddings, documentaries etc. Payed for itself within a couple of months, and I feel safe knowing it will actually hold value fairly well. Love the black magic cameras but they just aren't as flexible. I haven't had a single shoot where 4k was necessary, and it's pretty easy to rent a camera for the rare occasions I do need slomo over 60 fps. As for fs-7 /a7s vs Canon I've got to say the sony colors have always unpleasant to me. My only real complaints about the EOS line is that they're a pain to properly rig out for shoulder use and being limited to 8 bit color is lame.

August 28, 2015 at 5:54PM

3
Reply
avatar
Jon Gourlay
DoP
65

Yup, I agree with you for the most part. Though, I do think $8,000 - $9,000 would still be a fair price for the C300 Mark II.

October 29, 2015 at 2:23PM

0
Reply
Alexandra
Videographer / Documentary Filmmaker
378

C300 Mark II is back ordered for one month... pricing is fair now.

October 17, 2016 at 7:22PM

1
Reply
avatar
Walter Wallace
Spokesperson/Entrepreneur
1011

Your Comment