# Canon to announce RF mount cinema lenses alongside the Cinema EOS C300S and Cinema EOS C500S



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 14, 2021)

> Last month I reported that Canon would be bringing three new Cinema EOS cameras including the Cinema EOS C300S and Cinema EOS C500S that will shoot in 8K, as well as a new dynamic range monster in the Cinema EOS C700DR, which is rumored to have 20+ stops of dynamic range.
> Secondly, back in March, I reported that Canon would launch a line of RF mount prime lenses, and I now know which focal lengths we should expect.
> The new RF prime lenses will have the same character as the Sumire line of Cinema Prime lenses from Canon.
> Canon RF Mount...



Continue reading...


----------



## TonyNorthrup (May 14, 2021)

Do you think we'll get non-Cine versions of these lenses? I'd bet anything the T/1.3 lenses will be f/1.2, and T/1.5 will be f/1.4. That'll put Canon really far ahead of everyone else in the field of fast pro glass. Can you imagine astrophotographers choosing between a 14mm and 18mm f/1.4, gathering a full stop more light than any other platform? Really big news.


----------



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 14, 2021)

TonyNorthrup said:


> Do you think we'll get non-Cine versions of these lenses? I'd bet anything the T/1.3 lenses will be f/1.2, and T/1.5 will be f/1.4. That'll put Canon really far ahead of everyone else in the field of fast pro glass. Can you imagine astrophotographers choosing between a 14mm and 18mm f/1.4, gathering a full stop more light than any other platform? Really big news.



It's a different design team and cinema lenses are designed very differently. There are prime lenses coming that will interest you.


----------



## CanonGrunt (May 14, 2021)

18mm instead of 20mm. Seems they are really trying to give them the K35 vibe in every way. I’m all for it. 14 & 18 at T/1.5 would be amazing on the C70 and other super 35 cinema cameras. I wish they would throw a macro prime in there like zeiss has in their lineup though. Canon never did that in their cinema side. Great to see the 100mm. Sadly no 28. I prefer a 28 over a 24.


----------



## EOS 4 Life (May 14, 2021)

I would say that a swappable mount is an absolute must for the C700S which makes me wonder whether C300S and C500S will have swappable mounts as well.
Canon sells mount for a lot more money than adapters so it kind of would be silly of them not to.
(Though I can see more C300S users opting for focal reducers instead of swapping mounts)


----------



## rontele7 (May 14, 2021)

So does this mean C500ii/C300iii owners are never going to get even ONE firmware update?

Who does Canon think will be buying these new cameras, if they burn all the current owners?

The $15k-$20k camera market is small and highly competitive, and you’ve got to take care of your customers.


----------



## privatebydesign (May 14, 2021)

rontele7 said:


> So does this mean C500ii/C300iii owners are never going to get even ONE firmware update?
> 
> Who does Canon think will be buying these new cameras, if they burn all the current owners?
> 
> The $15k-$20k camera market is small and highly competitive, and you’ve got to take care of your customers.


Nowhere near as small as it used to be. Canon are famous for their customer care and after sales service and support, especially for C line users and working pros.

But don’t ever buy a camera today thinking it might be upgraded with firmware tomorrow, buy it for the features it has when you buy it. If that feature set and price works for you get it, whatever make, if not then don’t buy it.


----------



## t.linn (May 14, 2021)

So, to be clear, are the zooms referenced at the end of the post also cinema lenses?


----------



## Darecinema (May 14, 2021)

I think I need to start watching more heist tv series for ideas on how to get all the money I will need for this next round of cameras and lenses. But what I really wish canon would do is a set of anamorphics. They have the muscle to pull off a spectacular set of anamorphics that fall between the crazy expensive ones that are available and their current cinema lenses. Sigh...I can dream...


----------



## LJT (May 14, 2021)

What’s happening with the C50 that was being announced by June, have you heard anymore on that?


----------



## Antono Refa (May 15, 2021)

Canon Rumors Guy said:


> It's a different design team and cinema lenses are designed very differently. There are prime lenses coming that will interest you.


I know cinema lenses are designed for a higher standard, e.g. to be parfocal, but...

Once the glass elements for lens are manufactured, wouldn't reusing them for a MILC be a low hanging fruit? Are the materials or manual polishing for cinema lenses so expensive, it makes no sense to make a MILC version?


----------



## wanderer23 (May 15, 2021)

i hope they can somehow squeeze into a 95 OD instead of 114. But starting to find it hard to imagine these are going to be too far under 10k a pop. and most importantly hope they take care of the CA that the sumire's have


----------



## filmmakerken (May 15, 2021)

R5/Atomos V+, C70, C90, C300s, C500s, RF mount Sumire primes.... come on Powerball.


----------



## RunAndGun (May 15, 2021)

wanderer23 said:


> i hope they can somehow squeeze into a 95 OD instead of 114. But starting to find it hard to imagine these are going to be too far under 10k a pop. and most importantly hope they take care of the CA that the sumire's have



I‘d rather see 114. It’s pretty standard, plus both sets of their existing primes(CN-E & Sumire’s), compact zooms and handheld cine-zooms(17-120 & 25-250) are 114mm. And from a completely selfish standpoint, it’s perfect for me, considering I already own a full set of CN-E primes and a 17-120, so four of my five matte boxes have step-down rings to 114 or are native 114mm.

I don’t really see trying to go down to a 95mm front diameter being _that_ beneficial and especially not inside the already existing Canon ecosystem. It’s actually one of the few complaints I have about the Sigma Cine Primes. I was going to supplement my Canon’s with one of the Sigma’s and the 95mm front was going to make ”just one more thing” I was going to have to deal with and buy more accessories to handle.

Of course, if you are already starting with 95mm or are starting from scratch, you have a different perspective.


----------



## RunAndGun (May 15, 2021)

Antono Refa said:


> I know cinema lenses are designed for a higher standard, e.g. to be parfocal, but...
> 
> Once the glass elements for lens are manufactured, wouldn't reusing them for a MILC be a low hanging fruit? Are the materials or manual polishing for cinema lenses so expensive, it makes no sense to make a MILC version?



Still lenses are generally designed for absolute sharpness, resolution and to reproduce as clean and natural/unadulterated an image as possible. Whereas a lot of lenses designed for “motion picture” work are designed to produce more pleasing results on talent, have gentler focus roll-off, overall warmer look and things like that. We’ve especially been seeing the trend towards deliberately “soft/dirty” lenses over the last 3-5 years, especially as cameras have been increasing in resolution(ironic, huh...?). Some manufacturers are even producing multiple versions of the same lens: One line is “clean” and then a “soft/dirty”/“vintage look” line (character as a lot of people like to call it, now). And charging (sometimes significantly) more for them. Even Canon has done this with the CN-E’s and Sumire’s.


----------



## Antono Refa (May 15, 2021)

RunAndGun said:


> Still lenses are generally designed for absolute sharpness, resolution and to reproduce as clean and natural/unadulterated an image as possible. Whereas a lot of lenses designed for “motion picture” work are designed to produce more pleasing results on talent, have gentler focus roll-off, overall warmer look and things like that. We’ve especially been seeing the trend towards deliberately “soft/dirty” lenses over the last 3-5 years, especially as cameras have been increasing in resolution(ironic, huh...?). Some manufacturers are even producing multiple versions of the same lens: One line is “clean” and then a “soft/dirty”/“vintage look” line (character as a lot of people like to call it, now). And charging (sometimes significantly) more for them. Even Canon has done this with the CN-E’s and Sumire’s.


Legit, but wouldn't portrait photographers, as example, like that cinema look as well?


----------



## jvillain (May 15, 2021)

Antono Refa said:


> I know cinema lenses are designed for a higher standard, e.g. to be parfocal, but...
> 
> Once the glass elements for lens are manufactured, wouldn't reusing them for a MILC be a low hanging fruit? Are the materials or manual polishing for cinema lenses so expensive, it makes no sense to make a MILC version?



At least with the zooms the optical formula is usually very different. A great example of that is the Sigma 50-100 f1.8. The stills version is an incredibly sharp and beautiful lens but may have more focus breathing than any other lens ever made. The only lens in the world with two zoom rings and no focus ring. The cost of the stills version is $1000 USD. Sigma also sells it as the cine 50-100 T2 for $4000. Because of that there are a couple of companies that witll rehouse your existing lens or sell you rehoused versions so the price comes in at I think $2000. One of the companies that does that has managed to eliminate the focus breathing and made it parfocal but in doing so it loses all of it's sharpness and character. Same glass but how you move the elements when you turn the ring has an effect as well.


----------



## rontele7 (May 16, 2021)

privatebydesign said:


> Nowhere near as
> Nowhere near as small as it used to be. Canon are famous for their customer care and after sales service and support, especially for C line users and working pros.
> 
> But don’t ever buy a camera today thinking it might be upgraded with firmware tomorrow, buy it for the features it has when you buy it. If that feature set and price works for you get it, whatever make, if not then don’t buy it.


Spoken like someone who doesn’t own any Canon cine cameras. LOL. Fixing bugs isn’t a huge ask for a $20k camera system. C300&C500 have MAJOR issues that Canon refuses to fix, is this the “famous” service you speak of? They’re just going to release a new camera system?
The market is very very small. I don’t know where you’re getting your info from, it’s totally 100% at odds with the entire film industry.


----------



## dak3 (May 16, 2021)

*Me owning an original C300 in 2021 with my Canon Cine-EF prime lenses:*




*Me after seeing this post:*





*My bank account slapping me across the face and yelling my low balance at me:*





*Me realizing that my hopes and dreams are now crushed:*





*Me post-realizing that I need a reality check and that I don't need to be spending all this extra money on a new mount that won't improve my filming quality and techniques, and that Canon is just trying to make more money to stay 'hip' against Sony:*


----------



## TravelerNick (May 16, 2021)

So are these cameras FF or S35? If S35 I assume so are the lenses. Yes?


----------



## PowerMike G5 (May 16, 2021)

TravelerNick said:


> So are these cameras FF or S35? If S35 I assume so are the lenses. Yes?


The C300S will be S35 while the C500S will be full-frame. It's the main differentiator between the current ones recently released.

The lenses will definitely be FF to allow them to be used on both sensor sizes.

Based on the current rumor, it looks like the new stacked sensor design off-sets the smaller pixel pitch resulting from the increase resolution to 8K. So it looks like you gain 8K resolution with the same DR as the current new C300 MIII DGO sensor. Although we'l have to see how the noise turns out, given the higher resolution.

The rumored C700 replacement looks killer though, combining the best of everything: FF, new stacked DGO sensor design, and keeping the resolution at a sensible 4K, resulting in an even larger pixel pitch than the current C300 MIII/C500 MII, hence the rumored 20+ DR rating. It's possible, but let's see it first.


----------



## PowerMike G5 (May 16, 2021)

rontele7 said:


> Spoken like someone who doesn’t own any Canon cine cameras. LOL. Fixing bugs isn’t a huge ask for a $20k camera system. C300&C500 have MAJOR issues that Canon refuses to fix, is this the “famous” service you speak of? They’re just going to release a new camera system?
> The market is very very small. I don’t know where you’re getting your info from, it’s totally 100% at odds with the entire film industry.


I'm curious... what are the main issues of the current cameras that you think need fixing?

This is coming from a current C300 MIII owner. Having owned the MII, I think the current camera fixed practically all the shortcomings of the previous generation, in addition to adding a lot more.


----------



## wanderer23 (May 18, 2021)

RunAndGun said:


> I‘d rather see 114. It’s pretty standard, plus both sets of their existing primes(CN-E & Sumire’s), compact zooms and handheld cine-zooms(17-120 & 25-250) are 114mm. And from a completely selfish standpoint, it’s perfect for me, considering I already own a full set of CN-E primes and a 17-120, so four of my five matte boxes have step-down rings to 114 or are native 114mm.
> 
> I don’t really see trying to go down to a 95mm front diameter being _that_ beneficial and especially not inside the already existing Canon ecosystem. It’s actually one of the few complaints I have about the Sigma Cine Primes. I was going to supplement my Canon’s with one of the Sigma’s and the 95mm front was going to make ”just one more thing” I was going to have to deal with and buy more accessories to handle.
> 
> Of course, if you are already starting with 95mm or are starting from scratch, you have a different perspective.



Ah, you're right. Really makes sense if coming from a canon cine gear background. Almost all my lenses are 95mm OD (and a few 80mm) and i really like hte small form factor it gives, dont mind using donuts  But didn't realize CNE/Sumire are 114mm, really nor reason to change that then, agree with you. But I won't complain if they slim it down a bit!


----------



## miketcool (May 19, 2021)

Antono Refa said:


> Legit, but wouldn't portrait photographers, as example, like that cinema look as well?


No. Portrait photographers need controlled bokeh and fast AF. Lens flares are kept to a minimum and size needs to fit handheld. Elements are kept small to be easily moved with stabilizing motors.

Cinema lens properties are designed around how actors look in motion. Cinema lenses have slightly more depth so focus pullers can land their marks while the design is controlling vignetting, flaring, and contrast. Think of the classic panning image in cinema where a lens flare makes a perfect diagonal through the image. You would never want that in portraiture around flashes or light-boxes.


----------



## Darecinema (May 20, 2021)

rontele7 said:


> Spoken like someone who doesn’t own any Canon cine cameras. LOL. Fixing bugs isn’t a huge ask for a $20k camera system. C300&C500 have MAJOR issues that Canon refuses to fix, is this the “famous” service you speak of? They’re just going to release a new camera system?
> The market is very very small. I don’t know where you’re getting your info from, it’s totally 100% at odds with the entire film industry.


mmmm. I own multiple Canon Cinema cameras and have a 100% different experience than you. Maybe I'm just fortunate but over the last 7 years of Canon Cinema ownership and filming in multiple countries I have had nothing but amazing service every time I have needed it. Sure I pay a premium for having the CPS membership but it pays for itself in my opinion. 

Even just last week had a camera and lens smashed on set and had them sent in (rush FEDEX shipping there and back paid for by Canon as part of my CPS and Cinepak) rush reparied and turned around as good as new within 72 hours. I own the C300II, C70, C500, C300, C100 and C200 and have zero issues with those cameras. But I might just have a really different use case scenario. I'm definitely not a fan of the RAW files from the C300II, but what other major issues have you had? Are you referring to the original C300 or the new C300III? Actually curious what the bugs are you are referring to.


----------



## privatebydesign (May 20, 2021)

SwissFrank said:


> Yeah, no matter what the subject, @privatebydesign has no idea what he's talking about. I've blocked people for being rude but he's the first guy on this forum I've considered blocking just because they're so dumb.


And yet my comment got 10 11 likes, rontele7's got one. If I'm dumb then there are 10 times more people that agree with me, go figure.

Also he was asked directly what issues he has with the C300 by a C300 II/III owner but he never replied.

Oh, and people with personal experience of the great Canon service gave specific examples...

There are not widely reported issues with the C300 and C500, it doesn't take an owner to do that search. The C300II is a $7,000 camera (not $15-20k) and received a firmware update less than six months ago even though it has been superseded by the MkIII, an $11,000 camera.

I'm fine with people not liking me, but tell me where I am saying things that are incorrect?


----------



## foxfender (Jul 3, 2021)

Will these lenses be able to use Eye AF and tracking? if so it would be crazy!


----------



## Darecinema (Jul 5, 2021)

foxfender said:


> Will these lenses be able to use Eye AF and tracking? if so it would be crazy!


That’d be an interesting addition for solo operators but what would be more amazing is to have that focus data spit out to be able to be interpreted by various focus motor systems even on a tap to focus basis.

As long as the camera themselves are RF mount then for me it’s all golden because pretty much any lens in the world can be adapted to it at that point. 

But really my number one request would be to add anamorphics to the line-up. I think Canon, and potentially Sony, are the only lens companies in the world who would be able to craft an affordable medium high-end anamorphic. Maybe also Rokinon but as much as I like those lenses I still think because of scale they’d have a higher price point.

I like what Atlas and a couple of other newer players are doing, but to have a company that has the service capabilities of Canon would be a major value add. Of course there are also the $50,000 - $200,000 options but that’s ridiculously beyond my price point


----------

