# New Technology Coming to Cinema EOS



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 20, 2013)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/11/new-technology-coming-to-cinema-eos/"></g:plusone></div><div style="float: right; margin:0 0 70px 70px;"><a href="https://twitter.com/share" class="twitter-share-button" data-count="vertical" data-url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2013/11/new-technology-coming-to-cinema-eos/">Tweet</a></div>
<p><strong>From the interview with Mr Onda

</strong>Reading a bit between the lines during the interview with <a href="https://twitter.com/DSLRinformer" target="_blank">Dan Chung</a> and Mr Onda, it appears a few new things are coming to the Cinema EOS line and probably to EOS DSLRs as well.</p>
<p>The first being CFast 2.0, a version of Compact Flash announced back in 2008. SanDisk <a href="http://www.sandisk.com/products/memory-cards/cfastpro/" target="_blank">currently makes CFast cards that are capable of writing at 350MB/s</a>. These cards will be needed to record 4K RAW video. It sounds like Canon will be moving towards CFast in their next Cinema EOS cameras, and perhaps DSLRs as well.</p>
<p>Secondly, it seems there’s a possibility of a full frame Cinema EOS camcorder coming down the pipeline.  While you can currently get full frame 4K recording (16:9 crop from the full frame sensor) with the <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/855962-REG/Canon_EOS_1D_C_EOS_1D_C_4K_Cinema.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">EOS-1D C</a>, the <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/889545-REG/Canon_EOS_C100_EF_Cinema.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">C100</a>, <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/839220-REG/Canon_5779B002_C300_Cinema_EOS_Camcorder.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">C300</a> and <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/855975-REG/Canon_EOS_C500_Cinema_EOS.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">C500</a> are Super35 sensor cameras.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## pj1974 (Nov 20, 2013)

Such technological improvements will only benefit people all round - those wanting improvements in Canon's still photography (eg liveview as well as CFast) - and those in other brands.

Hoping to see 2014 be a great year for Canon: lots of great glass, some fantastic new innovention in bodies too!

Paul


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Nov 20, 2013)

I wish Canon would stop making printers, video cameras, photocopiers, calculators, projectors and scanners, I mean how do these high end cinema cameras with their sharp breathless lenses, their massive data throughput, sophisticated switchable sensor read-off, new AF technology and complicated alogorythm processors help us stills guys?

Canon should focus on what's important. I've only been doing photography since last year, but *I got a tax rebate / my wife left me / I had a midlife crisis / somebody in a camera shop told me my work was of professional standard** and so I bought a 5D3, and so therefore I deserve to be taken very seriously and consulted on canons every business or development decision. 

(*delete as appropriate)


----------



## AAPhotog (Nov 20, 2013)

It would be nice if they could update the CF drives for older cameras like the 5D3, once this comes out


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Nov 20, 2013)

AAPhotog said:


> It would be nice if they could update the CF drives for older cameras like the 5D3, once this comes out



I agree.

See, it can be nice when video development can aid the stills guys.


----------



## transpo1 (Nov 20, 2013)

AAPhotog said:


> It would be nice if they could update the CF drives for older cameras like the 5D3, once this comes out



That would be nice. But then why would we buy the new models?


----------



## Niki (Nov 20, 2013)

Canon really could just update their cameras…and not make new ones for a few years…the potential is there


----------



## transpo1 (Nov 20, 2013)

Agreed- I would love it if they would add functionality to their existing cams through firmware updates. 

Canon, if you're listening, one of the best ways to add value to cameras such as the 5DIII and keep people buying it for years is to add some of the Magic Lantern functionality into a future firmware update. Why not officially enable RAW recording and other valuable video features? 

This would keep sales from sagging too much as the 5DIII ages. 

I'll keep my fingers crossed, but the cynical side of me thinks they may just want people to buy the next model and keep sales rolling, too.


----------



## AAPhotog (Nov 20, 2013)

AAPhotog said:


> It would be nice if they could update the CF drives for older cameras like the 5D3, once this comes out


There are many customers who simply wont buy a new camera when theirs is only 3 years old. wouldn't it be nice to make 250-300 off of them for something as simple as a cf replacement?


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Nov 20, 2013)

transpo1 said:


> Agreed- I would love it if they would add functionality to their existing cams through firmware updates.
> 
> Canon, if you're listening, one of the best ways to add value to cameras such as the 5DIII and keep people buying it for years is to add some of the Magic Lantern functionality into a future firmware update. Why not officially enable RAW recording and other valuable video features?
> 
> ...



That sure would be nice and would seem to be the smart move to me.
But they seemed to be kind of bemused at best by ML Hack and not liking how it toyed with their segmentation (and yet don't they notice how the 5D3 price shot up after the ML Hack came out? and how the vieo /film guys were so meh about the 5D3's few little improvements, and all the BM talk? do they really want to keep risking giving it all away?)

Anyone get a weird feeling that the 5D3 + ML RAW hack will deliver much better video than any upcoming product new DSLRs for next year other than many some ultra $$$$$ $8000+ bodies? I have a weird feeling the new lower and mid-range and lower upper tier cams may end up with an even bigger meh and people will just use the 5D3. (The stills only users should have be happy though if so, as this would were it to be the case sustain 5D3 used prices very well so they could sell for a good price and get the new stills body.)

I sense continuing extreme segmentation and conservatism for anything but the single highest end model instead of a charging forward with the revolution.

Didn't the 5D3 prices suddenly spike way up again shortly after the ML RAW hack? And doesn't that imply that people were NOT happy with all of the critical UI features for video that they left out as well as the mushed, low DR quality it delivers without the hack? Everything was Blackmagic this and that and then the 5D3 hack seemed to be the only thing that staved off the complete rush over to use BM.

So the cynical side of me thinks that the new 2014 bodies won't even deliver video as good as the old 5D3 + a ML Hack can and they don't want to deliver that quality for another generation or two later (by which time you wonder if BM or someone else won't have handed it to them).


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Nov 21, 2013)

The trouble is that folk are impressed by the BMD's on paper but buying 5D3's because a) they are in the shops b) canon have (marginally) better QC and better chance of a unit that works properly c) works with the same accessories that worked for them with their 5D2's d) is easy to carry and change extra batteries e) no getting round it, the BMD looks like an 1980's alarm clock.

You know how I love car analogies. LOVE THEM. The BMD's are TVR's to Canon's Audi.


----------



## Valvebounce (Nov 21, 2013)

Hi Paul.
Are you saying BMD's are no longer in production? ;D ;D Or just have the reliability reputation of a TVR! :

Cheers Graham.



paul13walnut5 said:


> You know how I love car analogies. LOVE THEM. The BMD's are TVR's to Canon's Audi.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Nov 21, 2013)

I think a lot of 5D3 video users wished they had the specs of the BMD but have taken the safe option.

I'm in the process of getting capex for a cinema camera. I know I'll go with a C100 if it's ever granted, which is safe, reliable, easy to live with, available... My stockist would put me on a waiting list for the BMD, I could have a c100 a day after the capex comes in.

Don't wish to malign BMD unduly, I'm glad they are there pushing the market. I use their capture cards and ocassionally their hyperdeck.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Nov 21, 2013)

AAPhotog said:


> It would be nice if they could update the CF drives for older cameras like the 5D3, once this comes out



The cost to replace most of the guts in the camera might exceed the cost of a new camera. Its not a firmware upgrade. First. a SATA controller would be needed (New main Board), and then a new connector with the SATA pin-out. Then, a major firmware upgrade, few would want to pay 2K to upgrade a already 3 year old model camera that is worth $1500 by the time the CFAST arrives.

CFast cards are not physically or electrically compatible with CompactFlash cards. However, since SATA can emulate the PATA command protocol, existing CompactFlash software drivers can be used, although writing new drivers to use AHCI instead of PATA emulation will almost always result in significant performance gains. CFast cards use a 7-pin SATA data connector (identical to the standard SATA connector), but a 17-pin power connector that appears incompatible with the standard 15-pin SATA power connector,[38] so an adaptor is required to connect CFast cards in place of standard SATA hard drives.


----------



## Lawliet (Nov 21, 2013)

dilbert said:


> I've been waiting to see when CFast would show up in Canon. Nikon have in the D800 and I think that's the only camera to use it thus far.



That would be the D4. 
As for Canon, they have no good reason to use CFast unless there is a performance bottleneck to widen. Even the 1Dx isn't hamstringed by CF/UDMA, which means two actually useable slots offer better value.

Lets hope for a sensor that allows for faster readout - both for the video guys was well as the smart/result orientated still photographer.


----------



## paul13walnut5 (Nov 21, 2013)

+1

A faster readout could eliminate shutter curtains, enabling true high speed synch at full power and increasing the service life of cameras.

I would also take a switchable readout ala Sony FIT. Old tech. Would save all this 25p in 50i wrapper nonsense.


----------



## RGomezPhotos (Nov 21, 2013)

I was wondering if Canon was going to use CFast anytime soon. That's some serious throughput. But even with UDMA cards maxing out at 150MB/sec, you'll only get a top speed of 5fps on a shutter. Tops. While that trumps the Nikon. It's still 5fps. We're only going to keep putting more data through the camera. With a top speed of 350MB/s, there's plenty of room for growth opportunity in CFast.

Standardizing their top end cameras on CFast would be an excellent long-term strategy.


----------



## dgatwood (Nov 21, 2013)

This is a bit surprising. I'd have expected CFast to be completely dead at this point, given that nobody has adopted it after so many years, and given that its backwards compatibility story is nonexistent.

With SD's UHS-II offering very nearly the same performance as CFast 2.0, but providing full backwards and forwards compatibility with existing cards and readers, it seems like a much, much, much more sensible choice than CFast 2.0. CF is nonstandard enough as it is. It really doesn't make sense to go even further off the rails.


----------



## Drizzt321 (Nov 21, 2013)

dgatwood said:


> This is a bit surprising. I'd have expected CFast to be completely dead at this point, given that nobody has adopted it after so many years, and given that its backwards compatibility story is nonexistent.
> 
> With SD's UHS-II offering very nearly the same performance as CFast 2.0, but providing full backwards and forwards compatibility with existing cards and readers, it seems like a much, much, much more sensible choice than CFast 2.0. CF is nonstandard enough as it is. It really doesn't make sense to go even further off the rails.



The problem with SD cards is they tend to be not quite as physically robust as CF style cards (leaving aside the pin problem), and they also don't have room for a significant amount of NAND dies, which means you either have more bits per cell, which tends to wear out quicker and take longer to re-program, or you have less capacity. Also the CF style cards can be significantly more like an SSD since it's based off of UDMA, which means support for things like TRIM command (which lets the CF controller reset cells so they can be written to quicker) and other similar features.


----------

