The full, official press releases are located at:

Canon Announces Development of 4K Digital Cinema Cameras at DVInfo.net (http://www.dvinfo.net/news/canon-announces-development-of-4k-digital-cinema-cameras.html)

and also at:

Canon USA Announces Development of Four EF Cinema Zoom Lenses at DVInfo.net (http://www.dvinfo.net/news/canon-usa-announces-development-of-four-ef-cinema-zoom-lenses.html)

This is great news! 4K and 10-bit raw together. I wonder what the price and weight will be after the external recorder is added into the mix. There could conceivably be a recorder that compresses the data intelligently.

Anyone know why these came out today? I though Canon had an event on Sunday evening & that is when I was expecting a release. Were they just too excited & couldn't wait any more?

It might have been out of consideration for NAB-bound journalists like me.
I would have been way too busy at the show if they had dropped all these
PR's on Sunday evening. This way, I can get 'em published before leaving
for NAB, which is much more preferable.

Maybe the unexpected release of the FS700 had something to do with it.

Also, NAB starts on a Monday this year. Weekend press releases make little sense. Friday is the day people release bad news in the hopes that it will be ignored. Thursday it is!

Exhibits opening on Mon. has been the tradition for as long as
I've been going (since 1996). Of course, I'm not sure what it
was like before then, when it used to be hosted in Dallas.

These days I'm more involved in CES, which opens mid-week. Press day is the day before the show opens, with press events (from the big companies anyway) in hotel ballrooms while the booths are still being constructed. That makes more sense to me from a PR view. Who in the press wants to work on Sunday? :)

My first NAB was in Dallas, but I didn't realize it always opens on Monday. Lately, I go on whatever day(s) is/are convenient, and in the past, I'd go early for setup. Since my schedule has always varied, I didn't realize that NAB was so consistent!

Anyway, Thursday makes sense for an NAB announcement to me. :)

Ah, the meat grinder that is CES! But there's another topic...

Maybe the unexpected release of the FS700 had something to do with it.

I guess, but I'm not seeing anything that even remotely competes with the FS700 on features for the price. The C500 will most likely be $20,000+. Canon's offerings just aren't making sense to me. The C300 should have had the features of the C500 with a C100 offering for less than $10K. Are there really two different markets for both the C300 and the C500? I think those that would have bought a C300 will now buy a C500 when it is available. What Canon is missing is the sub $10K market.

I guess, but I'm not seeing anything that even remotely competes with the FS700 on features for the price. The C500 will most likely be $20,000+. Canon's offerings just aren't making sense to me. The C300 should have had the features of the C500 with a C100 offering for less than $10K. Are there really two different markets for both the C300 and the C500? I think those that would have bought a C300 will now buy a C500 when it is available. What Canon is missing is the sub $10K market.The C300 is $16K so I am sure that the C500 will list at $30K if not more. It's a 4K RAW camera aimed to compete with the Arri Alexa or Red Epic. I couldn't afford one nor would want to handle the 4K workflow whereas the C300 is all that I have wanted in a video DSLR & some as a complete self-contained package. The FS700 still has the weird ergonomics & over-complicated controls of the FS100 & I don't want to have to hook up another box to my camera just so that it records in a decent editing CODEC instead of AVCHD. If I ever had a need super slo-mo I can always hire one but as my day to day workhorse no thank you the C300 is just perfect for my needs. Read the excellent article by Steve Mims on his experiences with shooting with a C300 particularly page 3 which covers the ease & simplicity of use & the gorgeous images plus low light sensitivity The One-Offs: A Short Film Made with the Canon EOS C300 at DVInfo.net (http://www.dvinfo.net/article/acquisition/canon-eos/the-one-offs-a-short-film-made-with-the-canon-eos-c300.html)

I don't mean to suggest the C300 is not a great camera. In fact I'll evaluate it alongside the FS700. However, on the feature list they are fairly equivalent in my view. Pros and Cons with each for my usage. Price is the one thing that will likely force me to the FS700 side.

Makes me wonder who's in charge of design over there at Sony. Ugh.

Robert, not sure what you mean, could you elaborate? You saying that the FS700 is ugly or badly designed?

On spec I think the FS700 looks very promising. But, yes, I think it's fugly. Very. But that would be a stupid reason to ignore it or dismiss it. But I would never use the word "sexy" to describe it, that's for sure.

"Sexy" is saving me $7000 over the C300.

I think one should look at the 700 as a souped up FS100...still the avchd codec and it appears to not be a full 4K chip....but possibly a up rezzed chip to 4K.....can anyone find out? I'll stop by the Sony both to nail it down....either way, it is not the camera the C300 is and should not be compared with.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

Well if I'm wrong to compare the two, then I'll just be wrong. The C300 will undoubtedly have better image quality. But that is not the only point of comparison. Being someone who shoots, edits, produces, manages there is a whole lot more that goes into the evaluation. Does the improved image quality make my videos more effective? Which is easier to manage on a run and gun shoot? Is having a servo zoom important in some situations? How useful will the slow mo capabilities be? Can I justify the extra expense of the C300 to my bosses? What about file size and speed of going from shoot to finished product. Of course as a rental/sales person you may not think of all these factors, but equipment selection is not as simple as picking the camera with the best image.

I think and use all these factors you mentioned everyday....the keys that I put out there are what is repeated to me everyday by our clients, my friends in town that are working all the time, as well as my experiences on the set. When trying to decide which camera to buy, it's important to prioritize the important features, ones that you use every day, vs. the one you use once in a while (slo-mo is a good example). #1 for me is the picture taker (chip) and the codec.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

BTW, everyone on our sales staff has been, and still are working in the camera side of things here in town. The owner is a past president of the SOC & a top aerial DP for many years...and one my fellow workers is a 25+ year local 600 camera operator/DP and teaches cinematography at USC among others...

I have no doubt you and your staff are quite familiar with these questions and balancing your customers needs. However, I think you are also primarily in the Hollywood world also, which is only a small portion of those producing video. When you look at things from an institutional video world the balance of priorities is different. I may love the picture of the C300, but does it really (I mean in a broad aesthetic sense) improve my video. For example when I hire crews - I'd rather hire a good shooter with an EX1 for $1000 than a good shooter with a PMW-350 for $1600. I just don't need the extra bump in quality and don't want to spend my budget on it. I know in the end the videos will be equal in effectiveness - as the shooter and editor (me in this case) are more important than the camera. This is not to say I have ruled out the C300, I haven't. But, it will be a stretch to get it and I'm not sure I want to fly around the country with a $16,000 camera.

I can understand why you love Canon and the C300. You are the customer base they've focused all their energy on. There are other customer bases out there. I love my T2i and T3i and my $3000 worth of Canon lenses. They just aren't reliable enough, so I'm looking for a large sensor camera this year. I'd love to buy Canon. I'm just not sure I can with the offerings they currently have.

Good points.....and I'd add that of the many C300 we've delivered, the first 4 went straight to features of various budgets ($1 mil to $5 mil), about 10 went to small production companies (around the country), another 10 went to small ad agencys (around the country), another 10 or so went to small ad agencys that shoot there own ads, HBO's "LUCK" (since cancelled), "AX MEN", and a few other shows & features I can't name at this time.

Anyway, everything is good and I'm off to NAB!

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

I think one should look at the 700 as a souped up FS100...still the avchd codec and it appears to not be a full 4K chip....but possibly a up rezzed chip to 4K.....
Jim Martin
Filmtools.comWhat makes you say this Jim? I'm very curious how you came to this conclusion.

I don't mean to suggest the C300 is not a great camera. In fact I'll evaluate it alongside the FS700. However, on the feature list they are fairly equivalent in my view. Pros and Cons with each for my usage. Price is the one thing that will likely force me to the FS700 side.I was contradicting your assertion that those who were in the market for a C300 would now buy a C500 instead. I obviously haven't handled an FS700 yet but on the basis that it's only a slightly beefed up FS100 then I think that I am safe in saying that the C300 is a much nicer camera to hold & use. The fact that it is simple to operate & self-contained delivering a broadcast HD CODEC with no extra boxes or wires is a a big plus. It's designed to use Canon EF lenses & doesn't need use an unreliable 3rd-party adaptor. If you have been using DSLRs for video the C300 just immediately feels 'right' in your hands.

I'm also a big fan of the C300's form factor and general ergonomics - I think the C500 is perhaps most interesting for that reason - in that it should offer a lightweight, intuitive form factor for capturing seriously high-quality images (assuming the external recorder it needs isn't a monster).

Lighter weight camera gear - and the flow on affect that has on support gear, really can make a meaningful difference to the speed and ease with which you can shoot - and anything that saves time on set is a good investment as far as I'm concerned.

What makes you say this Jim? I'm very curious how you came to this conclusion.

I was talking about the 1st preliminary spec sheet I saw that only mentioned the 4K upgrade down the road....If it had a real 4K chip in it, I would expect Sony to tout it at the top of that spec sheet.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com