Canon USA introduces EOS-1D C Digital SLR camera featuring 4K

[Dylan Couper]

Originally Posted by Jim Giberti

Honestly, I mean this with all due humility - if you know how to shoot and light, 5DII footage looks gorgeous.

Isn't that true of pretty much any real camera? :)

[Brett Sherman]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Also, I don't think they're "neglecting" the lower markets.
These are NAB announcements after all. The high-end pro
gear is indicated for now. Prosumer, etc. to follow later.

Is this insider information? I see no reason to think this will be the case. Plus, the moniker "prosumer" is passe. The notion that you can't be a professional shooting on an $8000 camera is absurd. And comparison to what Betacam cameras used to cost is a bit silly. The problem Canon has now is how can they deliver an $8000 video camera while at the same time justifying the $15,000 they want to charge for the EOS-1D C or the $16,000 for the C300. I just don't see the wiggle room. Lack of 4K on the 1D C and dummying down the sensor on the C300? These are the only significant options. Can that alone justify a 50% price break?

There also tends to be an assumption on this board that Canon will eventually deliver and their decisions will make sense. I don't subscribe to that assumption. In the past, Canon has been extremely late to the market. They were 2 years behind Sony with HDV. The XF cameras are great, but they were also over 2 years behind the EX-1 and EX-3.

In my opinion, Sony has positioned themselves to take advantage of every level of the market. We'll see, but all I know is I'm looking this fall at purchasing a camera. I'm not expecting Canon to have any other offerings. I'd love to be proven wrong.

[Craig Kovatch]

With the 1D C listing for $15k, what are the odds we start to see cameras like the F3 enter the sub $10k market? There seems to be a real push for 4k by the manufacturers. One would hope this drives down the price of full frame 1080P cameras.

[Jim Giberti]

It's always pretty much the same - early adopters pay top price for new tech.

By the time 4k becomes of any real value/relevance outside of cinemas, it will be priced a lot differently.
As much as you read of the wish lists for clean HDMI out for a separate recorder, 4k etc., practically speaking, almost all of us producing TV, docs and promo work want to record our work in camera, at 1080p with a simple codec that our NLEs will ingest and edit simply.

Everything else is a niche right now and you pay for niche products.

Honestly, outside of a 4k screening environment, I can't see a DP that couldn't do as well with the 5DIII for $3500 (or 5DII for $2k) and L glass as they would with the $15k 1D C and PL glass.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Brett Sherman

Is this insider information?

No. It's just a well-educated guess on my part. However I have worked their side of the counter many times in the past, and I think I've got more than half a clue as to what their overall game plan is. It's still just speculation but I'm usually more right than wrong about these things.

Originally Posted by Brett Sherman

The notion that you can't be a professional shooting on an $8000 camera is absurd.

Agree 100% and I never meant to imply otherwise.

Originally Posted by Brett Sherman

And comparison to what Betacam cameras used to cost is a bit silly.

Sorry, I disagree. Although I'm pretty sure that I've been referencing the Varicam (elsewhere on the forum perhaps), which is much more relevant to this discussion.

Originally Posted by Brett Sherman

The problem Canon has now is how can they deliver an $8000 video camera while at the same time justifying the $15,000 they want to charge for the EOS-1D C or the $16,000 for the C300...

But they're doing that right now with the XF 305, a completely different kind of tool for a different kind of job.

Originally Posted by Brett Sherman

In the past, Canon has been extremely late to the market. They were 2 years behind Sony with HDV.

For that matter they were two years behind Sony with DV. It has always been that way with Canon and probably always will be. It's part of their conservative corporate culture and I don't expect that to ever change.

[Evan Donn]

Originally Posted by David Chilson

Not too sure how a $15,000 camera with no lens or audio and a fixed screen translates into a "huge potential savings in production costs" especially when coupled with a computer to wrangle the 4K footage. Could somebody please explain to me how this would make a good form factor for documentaries and news gathering?

The only positive reason I see posted so far for 4K is framing!? “Ya, know boss, I have been having a little problem with framing. If you would spring for a couple 4K cameras and update the editing suites, you wouldn’t be all over my butt about that framing thing”. This is saving me HUGE in production costs?

You're right - $15k is too high for this camera. I was just addressing your question of why anyone would even need 4k in the near future. However, I'm also operating under the assumption that the actual price will end up noticeably lower based on what happened with the C300.

But I still think there's a valid argument to be made here - assuming someone who is traveling regularly to shoot (i.e. doc/news shooters) and for whom having to carry half as much gear is a significant savings. If you're shooting with a pair of 5DmkIII with the kit lens you're already talking about $10k worth of equipment, plus the hassle of having to transport it and the support equipement. If you're shooting more than just sit-down interviews you'll also need a second shooter. It doesn't take a lot of days of paying a second shooter to quickly exceed the price difference even at the current $15k estimated price - and that's just paying a day rate, not even taking into account their additional travel costs.

This is still a DSLR camera that happens to shoot video and here’s a question. Do you think maybe the form factor is contributing to your framing problems?

Uh, no. I actually prefer the DSLR form factor in many situations, especially for some types of two camera setups - but there's been several times I can think of where having a single camera would have been much better. A specific situation I can think of is with the subject speaking directly into the camera - it's nearly impossible to do this with two cameras and have the eyeline look natural. No problem though with a single camera with enough resolution to crop wide and cu from the same shot.

[Brett Sherman]

"Prosumer" implies the pros and consumers buy it. I can assure you no consumers are purchasing an $8000 camera. Heck, when I tell people my GH2 cost $1000, they are shocked at how expensive it is. All the cameras we are talking about are professional cameras.

I wasn't specifically saying you said anything about Betacam. However there are posts that come up quite frequently to justify how much Canon's cameras cost, saying "remember how expensive it used to be XX years ago to get a Broadcast camera. $16,000 is cheap." I think that sentiment is irrelevant.

The second thing that happens is those like me who are not finding anything within my price range in the Canon line are immediately labeled as naive, expecting the moon for $1500. Nothing is further from the truth. I don't think it is unreasonable to want Canon to make a large sensor video camera for less than $10,000. Sony and Panasonic are able to do it.

The XF305 is a competitor to the EX1/EX3. There is no reason to sell my EX1 and buy it. 1/3" chips are not the look I'm interested in.

Strangely Canon was ahead of the game with large sensor cameras when they released the 5D. So now they are going from being two years ahead to being behind? What happened? But the real question is "Does Canon want my business?" Surprisingly, the answer seems to be "No."

[Brett Sherman]

Originally Posted by Robert Sanders

They don't have the same economies of scale that Panasonic and Sony have. Compared to those mammoths, Canon is a tiny company.

Apparently they want to stay that way.

[Jon Fairhurst]

Originally Posted by Peer Landa

I'm confused here -- are Jon and Douglas talking about different cameras..? Other than the 4K capability, I don't see much of a difference between the 1DX and the 1DC.

Sorry. My mistake.

The first photos I had seen associated with the 1D C articles showed the left side of the 1D C shown next to the right side of the 500C. Brain warp!

[David Chilson]

Evan,

We now have officially entered the “Twilight Zone”. Your post makes no sense and your second shooter scenario about costs is ludicrous. I do hire people and travel regularly to shoot and if weight/size is an issue I can get two cameras and everything I need in a Lowepro Slingshot. (Not counting support) IT WOULD NEVER BE TWO DSLR’s.

But going with your example of two brand-spanking new 5D mk III’s and kit lenses at $8600 plus tax just reinforces how stupid this $15,000 DSLR is. I could add an XF300 to my 2 5D III packages and still be less. Now I have three fantastic cameras up and running and you still have no lens OR audio. And you are talking about saving money in a daily rate? That’s absurd.

Anyone who chooses this $15,000 DSLR better be shooting and delivering in 4K TODAY or has more money than sense. If you’re actually running a business and don’t need to deliver in 4K this will be nothing but a huge waste of money. You want 4K for framing?!

I can pull off your subject speaking into the camera “crop” in camera with my $2995 XF100 while filming. Re-program the front push-button dial and you can go back and forth between wide and 1.5X till the cows come home or your audience gets sick of it. And if you’re really poor at framing you can crop that 10% more without noticeable loss. And for the love of god would you try and limit that move to two times maximum per interview, it’s already getting old.

IMHO anybody who would prefer the DSLR form factor in ANY situation (other than for the LOOK) doesn’t own a real video camera. And if you come up with one situation where a DSLR is better I can come up with ten where it’s lacking. We all have been tortured enough with shaky, fast and out of focus footage long enough.

See, I thought we already got past this about 20 years ago with Canon and XLR inputs on a proper video camera. There are some of us who remember when it was an OPTION. Canon was pretty much trained to put them on any real video camera they made and now at $15,000, they are starting to fall off again. This is insane.

[Kris Koster]

For a moment there I was beginning to sweat it. Having decided a fortnight ago to jump from the mark II to 5D3 to practically eliminate moire and aliasing, I thought I'd jumped too soon before the 1D C announcement.

Fortunately I can breathe again knowing not only is the 15K price tag out of my price range, it seems the camera won't be capable of producing 25fps footage for the European Market either. A non-starter.

The 5D3 is still not perfect for me, I really need 1080p/60fps minimum and I was shocked not to see it on the mark III. Canon are testing my loyalty right now!

From reading this entire thread, it appears a lot of people are getting rather impatient with Canon. Can't say I blame them.

I was one of those little folk swept up off my feet into their wonderful 5D mark II revolution. Although that was a game changer for me, it's a shame their little accident that recruited an army lacks the leadership to take the movement forward.

[EDIT:] A friend saw this post and sent an SMS, 'Did you not see the FS700 announcement?' ... Actually, I hadn't as I've been working flat out on a shoot all week and had only been keeping my eyes open for the NAB announcement on Canon's 4K DSLR. Now that I have, I think you know what I'm going to be saving up for until end of June. My only regret is buying the 5D3 too quickly afterall...

[Thomas Wong]

i've been waiting for a replacement for mk2 for months.... end up i got a used FS100 for couple hundreds more... i am happy with it. Can't wait til the C100 announcement... and i think canon won't sell it cheap

[Jeff Lower]

Don't get me wrong, I fell in love with my 5d mkII the first time I held it. It changed how I shoot and lit a fire in me that still has not gone out.

I also think this announcement is what the Nov 3 2011 announcement should have been. The specs on both the cameras look interesting, but here is my problem. They are just off the mark(price) ever since the C300. I mean why would I spend that $15 grand on the 1D-C for 4K 24fps when I could drop that into a Scarlet and get 4k at 24 - 30fps, not to mention shooting in RAW and on top of that I get HDRx.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to preach Red here, and the Scarlet has it's own hurtles to jump, media is expensive as hell, and the batteries are not the best. I chose a Scarlet over the C300, but Canon you really have forgotten about the market and the people that really kicked off the DSLR movement for you. Stop dreaming about Hollywood and come back to us.

[Walter Brokx]

Just one question:
why does everyone seem to interpret "Full HD 1920 x 1080 video at selectable frame
rates from 24p to 60p" as "you can only chose between 24 or 60fps?

I interpreted it as "you can chose framerates that lie between 24fps and 60fps".
Did I miss something?
Or is Canon silly enough to make the framerate mistake again? :-p

[Douglas Call]

here is a link to canons take on digital cinema options (C300 C500 EOS 1D C)

Canon Cinema EOS | Products: Cameras