Does Canon ever talk to their customers?

[Jim Martin]

we (the 3 of us) were particularly looking for the tell-tail smear that I see in a lot of the other cameras and we saw it in TWO shots that were using very fast camera movement..out of 4 films.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

[Brett Sherman]

Originally Posted by Jim Martin

they talked with 150+ ASC, SOC, etc, qualified DPs on this camera. These people are the best in this business and these cameras are directed right at them.....so I don't understand what the problem is......they were asked to produce a camera based on the input from these qualified professionals and Canon delivered.

Jim Martin
Filmtools.com

You do realize there are people outside of Hollywood that buy cameras. Probably only a very small percentage of the DSLRs sold were southern California purchases. I just don't see Canon selling many of these things outside of Hollywood. It's a big market for cameras there, but its not that big.

[Glen Vandermolen]

Originally Posted by Brett Sherman

You do realize there are people outside of Hollywood that buy cameras. Probably only a very small percentage of the DSLRs sold were southern California purchases. I just don't see Canon selling many of these things outside of Hollywood. It's a big market for cameras there, but its not that big.

I suspect Jim does indeed realize cameras are sold outside of Hollywood. His livelihood depends on it.

I think the C300 will sell pretty well. Not 5D good, but I think it'll make Canon some money. It seems to be a really nice camera.

[Robert Turchick]

After watching a few of the vids done on the C300 it's obvious that they have a really good camera to compete in a certain niche. No complaints...it's Canons flagship.

The rub is those of us who have been begging for canon to bring us a step up alternative to the DSLRs are left wanting. And I'd imagine that market-wise it's 100-fold the size of the market they released the C300 for. Look at the amount of af100 and fs100's that have been sold. I'd bet those cameras stole DSLR users away from Canon.

On one hand, why wouldn't Canon continue to shove DSLRs down our throats. They can double dip in the video and photo marketplace. And anyone who's currently using a DSLR already has the support gear and workflow figured out.
On the other, imagine their dominance of the mid level production world if they offered a camera that could control their lenses, had the 50mbps codec, a large sensor and cost the same as the XF300/305 with the same division base/hdsdi-genlock models. And they wouldn't need to offer a lens as we all have the glass we need!
They would make a killing with the current masses of DSLR users!
Same points could be made for Red's ever increasing price point on the Scarlet.

I think both companies, while trying to offer top end tools have left a huge black hole in the production world that desperately needs to be filled. Right now it's Panny and Sonys game and that's where my money may go when I decide to pull the trigger.

[Brian Drysdale]

Originally Posted by Brett Sherman

You do realize there are people outside of Hollywood that buy cameras. Probably only a very small percentage of the DSLRs sold were southern California purchases. I just don't see Canon selling many of these things outside of Hollywood. It's a big market for cameras there, but its not that big.

Selling large numbers don't mean that a product is profitable. It's one of those turnover V profit issues that have caused companies to go under.

I don't think this particular camera was ever intended for people who have been using DSLRs and wishing to remain at that budget level. It's more a statement of intent that they have entered a particular market. At this price the C300 isn't limited to Hollywood, there's quite a broad international professional market that could potentially be interested in the camera. There are advantages to the camera, although what the final street price will be remains to seen, but it will be closer to F3 or ideally between the FS100 and the F3 (although I don't think it'll go below the F3 price), than DSLR .

Sony didn't release the FS100 at the same time as the F3, although it was strong hinted at and there was also a mock up.

[Bernard Lau]

Canon's foray into the Hollywood market means that they'll test the water with their technology which will incorporate to the lower end models. So in the end, the benefit is to us, the ones that don't have that big of a budget.

I'm eagerly anticipating on the C EOS DSLR :-)

[Les Wilson]

BTW... for those with short memories, Jim, Glen, Robert Dave, Chris myself and others had pretty much this same discussion a year ago where Glen asserted Canon, like Apple, actually does not produce products by listening to customers (see post #43)
http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/canon-xf...down-line.html

Oh, and back then there was the hope of an XF200 to fill the famous "gap" and a solid state XL none which happened.

Originally Posted by Robert Turchick

...The rub is those of us who have been begging for canon to bring us a step up alternative to the DSLRs are left wanting. ...I think both companies, while trying to offer top end tools have left a huge black hole in the production world that desperately needs to be filled. Right now it's Panny and Sonys game and that's where my money may go when I decide to pull the trigger.

This is as a good a description as any of what I read the OP expressing. There isn't one "customer". There are market segments. Each company defines and targets them. The question is how many segments are on Canon's spreadsheet and which are they targeting with which product (if at all). For Canon, many segments are covered by HDSLRs versus competitor camcorders and thus single camera customers of Canon are frustrated with the HDSLR audio and video "workarounds" trying to use HDSLRs in ENG use cases. Actually, staying loyal in this situation may feed a "they'll never leave us ... let them eat cake" corporate strategy... especially in lean tsunami ridden times.

Originally Posted by Brian Drysdale

Selling large numbers don't mean that a product is profitable. It's one of those turnover V profit issues that have caused companies to go under....Sony didn't release the FS100 at the same time as the F3, although it was strong hinted at and there was also a mock up.

You are absolutely right that products are profit driven. But looking past the Canon line, the Sony Z5, Z7, AX2000, NX5U, EX1r, EX3 are six, count them SIX, 3-ring solid state 3-chip cameras across a price range from $3k to $8K. Two have interchangeable lens mounts. In that range, Canon has one fixed lens solid state camera at $6500/$7500 and a companion 10x lensed 1-ring "little buddy" camera at $3k. Several sub $6K market segments exist and other companies are competing in them. Arguably, Canon, after 3 years and several product cycles has never provided a solid state equivalent for it's tape based A1 prosumer customers. This lament is a recurring theme here on DVinfo. And recall, the XF300 came out almost 2 years after the EX1 when Sony was shipping the version 2.0 of that camera.

In the single chip "Cinema" space, the Sony VG-20, FS-100 and F3 define 3 body-only price points at $1600, $5K and $14k. Panasonic has the AF-100 at $4800. Canon has one at a TBD street price off of $20K list.

There are various segments. Canon's decade long MO is to be last to market with a package differentiated in some way. It has few products in these segments. It's getting coverage using HDSLRs which Sony and Panasonic also have but without the 12-minute restriction. So in spite of reading DVinfo (actually some say line employees read it and translate it to management so I wrote my feedback in Japanese once), threads like this keep coming up and more Canon customers move on to other company's product lines. If Glen is right, Canon doesn't produce products by listening to customers anyway.

Originally Posted by Bernard Lau

Canon's foray into the Hollywood market means that they'll test the water with their technology which will incorporate to the lower end models. So in the end, the benefit is to us, the ones that don't have that big of a budget.

I'm eagerly anticipating on the C EOS DSLR :-)

Actually, the analysis I agree with is that like the XL-H1, Canon aimed the XF300 and it's 422 CODEC squarely at the broadcast market. The XF100 was a companion "buddy" product for POV applications. Neither addressed the customer requirements for a solid state A1 replacement segment. Those customers either downgraded to the 1-ring 10x XF100 or XF10 consumer camera, moved to HDSLR or went to Sony, JVC, or Panasonic. So for the current Canon line, getting technology in lower end models is a downgrade compared to other product lines. Wait for the C EOS DSLR all you want, people have been waiting for the 5DM3 for a couple years already. There's no assurance the C EOS DSLR will be full frame either. The VG-20, FS-100 and AF100 are out there now.

I don't see it as "they'll test the water with their technology which will incorporate to the lower end models" at all. Any more, Canon enters late (on purpose) with something aimed at the broadcast (and now Hollywood) segment(s) then produces a second model which is still (from a product feature perspective) aimed at complimenting the high end segment not the under $5K prosumer segment. Take it or leave it. Hence my point earlier about "eating the scraps off the broadcast/cinema segment table". In fact, the A1 could be viewed in the same way, a compliment to the XL-H1 that (happily) also satisfied a piece of the prosumer upgrade-to-HD demand.

Look, I was as rabid a Canon XL1s, XH-A1, 20D, S95 toting fan-boy as they come. I wish Canon produced the camcorders when I needed them but they didn't. Others did so I moved on. I tolerate the 5DM2 because it doubles as a stills and b-camera for traveling. Otherwise, I'd have moved to an FS-100 or AF-100 for sDOF in a heartbeat (or if it were now, take a look at the VG-20).

IMHO, loss of market share actually does show up on a spreadsheet at Canon and is probably a far more influential form of feedback for us "folks" than posting here. As I say often, brand loyalty only helps the brand, not you. Stop waiting around, buy from the company that makes what you need and go tell stories. It's much more fun that being frustrated with equipment that doesn't do what you need. IMHO.

[Mike Marriage]

Originally Posted by Brian Drysdale

Selling large numbers don't mean that a product is profitable. It's one of those turnover V profit issues that have caused companies to go under.

Very true but I'm surprised that Canon hasn't gone after market share with the C300, enabling them to recoup R&D from volume sales and also selling a lot more lenses. I'd love to know the production cost of the C300 but considering it is the guts of the XF300 (or even XF100) minus a lens and plus a larger sensor, I can't see that it would exceed the low thousands of dollars.

There has been mention of Canon stills and video departments not wanting to tread on each others toes. Maybe that inflated the price of the C300 - ensuring that it was a totally separate market segment from HDSLRs.

[Glen Vandermolen]

Actually, Les, I was quoting Steve Jobs as an example of how a company can be so original, they create products you WANT, not always necessarily what you need. Apple makes products based upon what they think people will want, and bypass the focus groups and such. It doesn't always work out; Apple does have some big failures in their history.
Maybe the XF300 was somewhat like that. Canon knew they had to enter the tapeless broadcast market, so they came up with a doozie of a camera. So good, right off the bat, it was accepted as the first full-acquisition 1/3" chip HD cam by the stoic BBC. Many cried out that it should have been a 1/2" chip cam, but Canon made it 1/3" anyway.
But based upon what I've been hearing about the development of the C300, Canon does listen to its customer base. The 5D, which started the low budget, large sensor video revolution, was an answer to requests from photographers for a DSLR camera that could also shoot HD video. The success of the 5D caught even Canon by surprise. So by listening to one group of customers, Canon inadvertedly created a whole new customer base.

I agree with others who state this is Canon's first step into the new market of digital cinematography. I know many aren't happy with the price, or its lack of some higher-end features (10-bit), but it still seems like a heck of a good camera. We'll soon see what the actual street price will be. And I'm sure this is the first product of many, so hang on; it will only get better. Remember, the XF300 begat the XF100.

I'm still more intrigued by that new cinema DSLR. This could be that mid-tier cinema camera everybody's hoping for.

[Don Miller]

Originally Posted by Les Wilson

Wait for the C EOS DSLR all you want, people have been waiting for the 5DM3 for a couple years already. There's no assurance the C EOS DSLR will be full frame either. The VG-20, FS-100 and AF100 are out there now.

It is ironic how well Sony and Panasonic listened to Canon's customer base. They really didn't like what happened with the 5DII. Canon responds with the 1DX for sport shooters, and a $20,000 video camera. Neither available in 2011. It's hard to see a customer focused well executed corporate strategy here. Even assuming the video out of each of these new cameras is superb.

The sensor of Cinema DSLR will be full size (FF35 or whatever we're calling it) because the only processor package likely to handle the large file is in the pro size 1DX. Canon's not going to make a whole new camera. They're going to stick a purpose-built sensor in what they got. If they get crazy maybe they'll change a couple buttons on the 1DX body to make the "C" version.

Would a C100 sell? The C300 body with a regular bayer sensor (2-3K) and the XF100 processor package? It would have huge photosites like the F3. Obviously it would still be 8 bit.

[Les Wilson]

Originally Posted by Glen Vandermolen

...But based upon what I've been hearing about the development of the C300, Canon does listen to its customer base....

You say they do while others say they don't. The only way both can be correct is to understand they are different "customers" or market segments. The Canon camcorder product line reflects broadcast and cinema customers. Other videographers are getting their Canon gear from still camera designers and engineers.

When I hear people complain about Canon not listening, they are a customer segment not satisfied by the HDSLR and broadcast/hollywood driven products. That's the segment that keeps stringing along hoping for a "buddy" version they can afford (or scraps off the table version as I called it) while (generally speaking) the features they want are already available elsewhere but they want some special spec in their equipment and are being "loyal".

The 5DM2 was not meant to be a video camera. It was a happy accident. The XF300 begat nothing. I think Canon thought there was a need for a POV camera with a compatible codec for it's broadcast customers. Those are the requirements I see in the XF100, not the requirements of the $3000 prosumer one man band customers....unless they like the broadcast driven features (or scraps). In fact, the XF100 was the discussion point where you made the point about Canon "creating products that you want". Lots of under $5k prosumers taking a pass on a 10x, single ring, single 1/3" camera downgrade.

[Jon Fairhurst]

Originally Posted by Don Miller

...Canon responds with the 1DX for sport shooters, and a $20,000 video camera. Neither available in 2011. It's hard to see a customer focused well executed corporate strategy here...

Let me give it a shot. :)

The oldest DSLR in Canon's lineup is the 1D3s. The rumor sites have tied themselves in a knot over a 1D4s (and a 24-70/2.8L IS lens) for well over a year, but it never came about in the Digic IV generation. Now the Digic V is available and shipping in some point and shoots. It's not really a surprise that the first camera out is a full frame 1D(s) model. It unites the 1D and 1Ds lines. And, yes, they listened to us. All indications are that it should have minimal aliasing and reduced rolling shutter (due to the faster sensor & processing).

This sets the stage for the next 5D, 7D, etc. But, development schedules being what they are, and the tsunami causing heartache and delays, we won't get these Digic V models until 2012. Undo the tsunami and we would probably be scrambling to buy the initial 5D3 (5D X?) cameras right now.

Now consider the C300. This is part of a major "customer focused well executed corporate strategy" where the company is launching a new service center and entering a brand new sector for Canon. The business model is built on low volume and high pricing, which is the norm for that customer base. The first product is somewhat modest, but that's due to using the older, 8-bit, Digic DV III image processor in order to accelerate their entry. Clearly, this is only the first in a line of products. (And don't forget the lens announcements which are also part of the strategy at > $6k per prime lens.)

As I see it, the strategic moves are clear and are being well executed, given the reality that product development takes time and a major natural disaster can disrupt the best of plans.

The bottom line is that the recent announcements target the pro still shooter and Hollywood. Canon was clearly sensitive to the fact that they didn't address the lower tiers; hence, the sneak peek at the Cinema DSLR. We have yet to see what the company will do next for the consumer DSLR and budget video shooter markets. Those plans have yet to be revealed.

Maybe we'll learn more at CES in early January...

[Mike Marriage]

Originally Posted by Jon Fairhurst

We have yet to see what the company will do next for the consumer DSLR and budget video shooter markets. Those plans have yet to be revealed.

Problem is how will they separate a lower class model. They can't realistically step down from 1080p or decrease framerates. With the XF100 already recording at 50Mbps that would also be a hard omission to justify. They could remove HDSDI output and XLRs but then you are heading away from a video camera by doing so. Output also can't go any lower than 8 bit.

They could develop a cheaper sensor but would that really be more cost effective than using what they have already developed?

I think that is why people are surprised by the announced price. It appears to sit more between the F3 and the FS100, not above the F3. As all three of those cameras are capable of great images and all have major ergonomic shortcomings, a lot of buying decisions will be based on the specs and resulting workflow.

Okay, so Canon (or anyone else) if you are listening, I'd love to see:

C300's S35 sensor, exchangeable EOS/PL/Nikon mount, C300's 50Mbps 4:2:2, (F3's) 4:4:4 Dual link 10 bit output (combined with a sensor capable of true 4:4:4), proper movie camera ergonomics with VF in the right place (a little like the JVC HD100 line).

Prores recording would be a nice option too, maybe as a separate add on integrated into the design. 4K RAW as another option.

Eventually I think we'll see simultaneous RAW and processed recordings like we already have in stills but maybe that is still a few years off. That would be great for documentaries offering speed and flexibility when required.

[Brian Drysdale]

I'm not sure that the C300 itself is "Hollywood", it's market it broader than that. The Paramount launch is more a statement of intent that they're getting involved in the higher end professional market, both with the lenses - Fujinon have been involved with Arri and the cameras.

This particular event wasn't really the place to launch a lower end camera, there are numerous shows during they year for doing that.

[Jon Fairhurst]

Originally Posted by Brian Drysdale

I'm not sure that the C300 itself is "Hollywood", it's market it broader than that.

I'd agree. In fact, I'd say it's more "Burbank" (TV) than "Hollywood" (Cinema), if you know what I mean, and TV production is done worldwide. The announcement and the commitment to the industry with the new service center imply that this isn't about a single product. It's a whole new commitment to the professional video market.