# New EF Mount Video Camera in October? [CR1]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 1, 2011)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; margin: 70px 0 0 0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/09/new-ef-mount-video-camaera-in-october-cr1/"></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 -50px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/09/new-ef-mount-video-camaera-in-october-cr1/" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/09/new-ef-mount-video-camaera-in-october-cr1/"></a></div><strong>Video camera rumors are floating around.

</strong>I have now heard from two different people that a new Canon video camera will be coming down the pipe soon.</p>
<p>They differ in the capability of the camera, below is the different information.</p>
<p><strong>Camera Rumor 1

</strong>- Video style body

- APS-C Sensor

- EF Mount<strong>

</strong></p>
<p><strong>Ã‚ Camera Rumor 2

</strong>- Video style body

- PL & another mount (Not EF).

- APS-C Sensor</p>
<p>I was also told there would be a â€œgroupâ€ of October announcements from Canon.</p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## Bob Howland (Sep 1, 2011)

*Re: New EF Mount Video Camaera in October? [CR1]*



dilbert said:


> I wonder why they've gone for APS-C and not full frame? Yield? Cost? Performance?



Probably because APS-C width, 22.5mm, is close to the width of 35mm movie film. See 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/35_mm#Technical_specifications . As far as I know, that is what the PL lens mount is designed for.


----------



## kirillica (Sep 1, 2011)

*Re: New EF Mount Video Camaera in October? [CR1]*



dilbert said:


> Two new video cameras from Canon?
> 
> I wonder why they've gone for APS-C and not full frame? Yield? Cost? Performance?
> 
> Good to see that they recognise that they need to stay in touch here...


No, only one. One of the rumors can become true.

Why you need FF, if HD is just 1920Ã—1080 or approx 2,1MPx? I wonder they should have some new algorithm instead skipping lines implemented now... :


----------



## Bob Howland (Sep 1, 2011)

*Re: New EF Mount Video Camaera in October? [CR1]*



kirillica said:


> Why you need FF, if HD is just 1920Ã—1080 or approx 2,1MPx?



Because the camera probably won't record as 1920 x 1080. Take a look: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8K_Video_Format


----------



## kirillica (Sep 1, 2011)

*Re: New EF Mount Video Camaera in October? [CR1]*



Bob Howland said:


> kirillica said:
> 
> 
> > Why you need FF, if HD is just 1920Ã—1080 or approx 2,1MPx?
> ...


I don't believe this will be 8K. But 4K is still only 12MPx


----------



## EYEONE (Sep 1, 2011)

*Re: New EF Mount Video Camaera in October? [CR1]*

If this is a EF mount video camera with a APS-C sensor will it allow EF-S lenses too?


----------



## Bob Howland (Sep 1, 2011)

*Re: New EF Mount Video Camaera in October? [CR1]*



EYEONE said:


> If this is a EF mount video camera with a APS-C sensor will it allow EF-S lenses too?



Your guess is as good as anybody's. However, consider the possibility that the other (non-PL) lens mount will be a video-oriented backward-compatible derivative of the EF/EF-S lens mount, perhaps with more pins and power zoom capability. That might account for the seemingly mutually exclusive rumors.


----------



## gene_can_sing (Sep 1, 2011)

*Re: New EF Mount Video Camaera in October? [CR1]*

Now this would be amazing, although I still would rather have a Full Frame 5D3 video, but who knows when that will ever come.

It would obviously have to be mirrorless, so probably have a short flange length and can adapt any lens. I remember a while back, Canon issued a patent for an EOS electronic adapter which is for mirrorless Canons. That's probably for this video camera.

Canon needs to get back into the large sensor video game. They are about to / getting smoked by Sony and Canon.


----------



## bwhitz (Sep 1, 2011)

*Re: New EF Mount Video Camaera in October? [CR1]*

If this is true, they really need to do something different with these. It would have to be at least a 2k camera, probably 4k. I wouldn't really be interested in just another 1080p video camera...


----------



## justicend (Sep 2, 2011)

This might be true, Canon has it's PL mount cine zoom lens. May be one with the PL mount gonna cost lot. 2k and HD are matter of aspect ratio. 4K is gonna make difference.


----------



## studio1972 (Sep 2, 2011)

*Re: New EF Mount Video Camaera in October? [CR1]*



Bob Howland said:


> kirillica said:
> 
> 
> > Why you need FF, if HD is just 1920Ã—1080 or approx 2,1MPx?
> ...



Actually the main reason for full frame would be to make better use of L lenses and allow shallower DoF and better low light performance.


----------



## skitron (Sep 2, 2011)

I really hope this rumor is true and that Canon did it right to compete with the Sony VG-20. This means EF mount, superb low light, in cam anti-shake (software based), quality codec, manual controls, full time autofocus, good microphones with option for fully controllable outboard mics and no line skipping. I'll wait for October to see what Canon offers in hopes it can use my existing glass and it can take a competent still.


----------



## Etienne (Sep 3, 2011)

*Re: New EF Mount Video Camaera in October? [CR1]*



studio1972 said:


> Bob Howland said:
> 
> 
> > kirillica said:
> ...



Video doesn't need as shallow DOF as stills. Focus is too difficult. With stills, a shot is taken as soon as focus is achieved. With video, the subject moves. Even if it's a small movement, it is very difficult to keep the subject in focus, so the slightly deeper DOF of APS-C is not a disadvantage for video in the way that it can be for stills


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Sep 3, 2011)

*Re: New EF Mount Video Camaera in October? [CR1]*



Etienne said:


> Video doesn't need as shallow DOF as stills.


You're right to say that video with shallow DOF isn't critically important for many people and is difficult to use - yet people still have been buying and using the HD video-enabled DSLRs and using them to replace production video cameras. Most people have been using the ability to replace camcorders - photojournalists shooting quick segments or making video notes, hobbyists using it as they would a camcorder (less than successfully I would add).

It is a new market but already we can see that it is split into two categories.

The real question about the evolution of video in the EOS format is whether they will try to make it more like a camcorder, to appeal to everybody (somewhat like the NEX I suppose) or whether they will try hard to make it more useful for pros. Professionals already love the low cost and maneuverability of DSLR video, and Canon probably would like the opportunity (or more accurately, recognizes they can't lose it, since these SLRs are going cheaper than even Canon's pro camcorders) to grab a new market and not rely on either their camcorders and even more expensive professional video equipment ($100,000 zooms for sports coverage aren't going to expand into new markets). From Canon's perspective, the troubling aspect is that this might gut pro video products, but since Canon just recently joined the PL mount group it seems that they didn't have much at stake in that market so far. Even if they don't cost as much per unit (remains to be seen) as a pro camcorder, they probably would be able to sell a good volume of them, and that could be more profitable. They are clearly gearing up to be able to move with the market with these moves, and perhaps not so confident that they can dictate how it will end up - which is just fine.

I previously have said that EF mount is pretty silly for video, as it stands with the current lens lineup (ignoring third party manual focus lenses, but not ignoring the problems with the video quality and usability of current DSLRs with video) but if they make some lenses appropriate for video, perhaps some even with autofocus capability - and all with good manual focus rings - this system will look more attractive to video users from both camps. They probably need continuous and quick video autofocus to get hobbyists on board, though - pros are already accustomed to manual focus for movie productions.

There are some quite interesting options possible if Canon goes into pro video - IS on video lenses has some obvious applications for even movie shooting, and should help free cinematographers from expensive rails and steadicam systems.

The one real hole in the system, so far, has been continuous focus. It's not much used for the movies but many people would buy a competitor's camera (say a Sony SLT) for just that reason.


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Sep 3, 2011)

*Re: New EF Mount Video Camaera in October? [CR1]*



kirillica said:


> I don't believe this will be 8K. But 4K is still only 12MPx


You do realize that the processing unit, storage space, and the batteries to actually run 12MP video at a reasonable frame rate means that this could not possibly fit in a DSLR with today's technology, right?

4K is what some (not all!) RED cameras do, and they aren't exactly pocketable.

Canon might try to put something into that market segment, but for the moment it is definitely out of our reach. Give it another ten years (at least).


----------



## c.d.embrey (Sep 4, 2011)

*Re: New EF Mount Video Camaera in October? [CR1]*



dilbert said:


> Two new video cameras from Canon?
> 
> I wonder why they've gone for APS-C and not full frame? Yield? Cost? Performance?
> 
> Good to see that they recognise that they need to stay in touch here...



APS-C, also known as Super 35, is what Hollywood uses. Hollywood film cameras were APS-C, Digital Cine cameras like the Arri Alexa, RED and Sony F35 are all APS-C. The last time a 24x36 frame was used was the Paramount VistaVision camera, that format died about 1960.


----------



## c.d.embrey (Sep 4, 2011)

*Re: New EF Mount Video Camaera in October? [CR1]*



studio1972 said:


> Actually the main reason for full frame would be to make better use of L lenses and allow shallower DoF and better low light performance.



Shallow Depth of Field??? Most Hollywood movies are shot at f2.8-4.0. I've work on some that were shot at f5.6. A lot of what I see on the 'net are unwatchable due to "paper-thin-DoF."


----------



## c.d.embrey (Sep 4, 2011)

I've given up on Canon, too big, too conservative and too slow for the fast moving modern world. I'll keep my Canon DSLRs, because they still work well, for my advertising stills. But I'm not planning to buy anymore Canon gear.

Today I went down to the Sony store and ordered a 16mp NEX 5n as a "crash camera" for some upcoming motion jobs. It shoots 1080x1920 60p, 60i and 24p and costs $599.00 for a body. One quarter the price of a 5DII. I've been working with Sony video cameras since the late 1980s, and I've never had any real problems.

If the NEX 5n takes good stills, I'll replace my four year old Canon DSLRs with the 24mp NEX 7. I've been waiting way to long for Canon to build cameras I find useful. *You snooze, you lose.*


----------



## catz (Sep 4, 2011)

If Canon comes up with a APS-C video camera that is based on SLR technology:
- EF mount
- Resolves full 1920x1080 pixels with no aliaising, meaning every pixel captured is a real pixel, no line skipping, but enough horse power in CPU to reduce high megapixel image to 2K without artefacts. So far only the few and mostly expensive cameras achieve this, one of them notably is RED and another Arri Alexa. Typical camcorders do not achieve typically pixel perfect full 1920x1080 pixels but somewhat less than that. 5D achieves only about half of that due to line skipping which makes the resolution rather poor vertically (not that poor horizontally but still not up to the resolution that would qualify as full hd).
- high bit rate 422 or 444 codec and records to compact flash like 5D
- outputs clean 10 or 12 bit 444 from HD-SDI, can be captured with external recorder
- same functions for video than 5D mk II has in manual mode
- resolves the same amount of latitude than 5D in still images, and video looks like 5D stills resized to 1920x1080 frames
- cost no higher than 1D mark IV. Preferably in the realm of 5D mark II.
- body shape and size small, similar to RED Epic, meaning that it resembles more DSLR than a camcorder (RED Epic is smaller than RED One). No long camcorder body. Something that is easy to carry around and then can be hooked to different kinds of rigs to suit each filming situation best.
- it would take also high quality stills, with quality and capabilities rivaling 5D mark II or 1D mark IV. It would replace my still camera, and not be video only.

If Canon would come up with only this, even if it wouldn't have 3K or 4K (which would be nice but not mandatory for a killer product today, these will be essential tomorrow, but today absolutely perfect 2K would be sufficient), it would be a killer product. It would be a total bye bye for Sony FS100, F3, Panasonic AF100, etc. People would go screaming to buy these, me included. I am afraid that Canon does not pay attention what they should do and they don't see that they are only 1 millimeter close from the jackpot. I am afraid they fail to see that they are this close and competitors will go around Canon from left and right, like for example, Sony FS100 now shows.

Dear Canon product managers if you read this, please do this and do it fast --^ You have all the R&D workforce to execute, please let them do what they can do.


----------



## Tranlezark (Sep 5, 2011)

I've been tossing up between the Panny AF100 and the Sony FS100 - and not really happy with either (mainly because I already have EF glass). I'm seriously pumped about this rumour and will probably hold off any purchases until after October now.

My thoughts, for what they're worth:

My guess would be that a Canon large sensor video camera would be positioned to compete with these cameras (retailing for around $6k), so I doubt we would see 444, 2K (or higher), or 10-bit recording, even through HD-SDI. Canon _could_ make a Red Epic competitor, but is that where the market is?

If it records 4:2:2 at 50+Mbps internally, (like the Canon XF105 does), then this camera would be head and shoulders above the Sony and Panasonic. I wonder if they would also charge an extra $1000+ for HD-SDI output as per XF100/XF105 and XF300/XF305.

I know that the Panasonic and the Sony large sensor video cameras both borrowed a lot of design and form from their existing video cameras. Is that likely with Canon? How closely do Canon's DSLR and video camera teams work?


----------



## catz (Sep 5, 2011)

> Canon could make a Red Epic competitor, but is that where the market is?



That would be the market if Canon would make Red Epic competitor at price level in the realm of indie film makers, wedding photographers etc. Red Epic is Ã¼ber highend and Red can handle that niche for sure. However, that niche would no longer be niche if it was affordable enough. 

The price of the camera (e.g. 3000, 6000, 12000, 27000) has nothing to do with the ability to do 4K or 444. The price is exactly what the product management decides, and the manufacturing cost may be a tiny fraction of it. The smaller the production cost vs. sale cost, the higher the margins. We can clearly see that the margins on e.g. 15000 dollar camcorder are huge - not more expensive to manufacture than a DSLR but price many times higher. Given enough CPU/GPU horsepower, the camera could do wonders with very little manufacturing cost.

Hint: Consumer grade graphics cards from nVidia and AMD exceed the horse power needed to make perfect 1080p or even 4K video out of e.g. 24 mpix source material. These cost 100-300 dollars per unit (for the whole card). If you have a integrated chip solution in a camera and volumes would be high, the manufacturing cost would be a fraction from the price of a camera sale price.

There you have it, there is no Steve Jobs of camcorders at the moment, but if such person would appear, he or she would do the following: Utilize latest GPU technology to have enough processing capability to make the video aliasing free and perfect 1080p, 2K and 4K without optical antialiasing filter. Use existing technology from DSLRs and put it all together. And you have a RED killer with price point of mere iMac and you could sell millions. Or if you want it to be niche, of course you could price it 100000 and sell 5 units. Or you could be like Sony, you would make a professional version and then cheap version out of it, you would make some artificial degradation of the quality or lack of basic important function to the consumer version to make it "consumer" (consumer is to be fooled, they are sheeps right?). Some competitors of Apple were in that kind of business until Apple almost killed them by introducing products which run circles around them despite anyone else could have done those too, technology would have been all there, but they chose not to do it because it was "too nice" "too new" "too unconventional" "nobody has that kind of things". Yea right, until someone wiser has, dinosaurs die to starvation.

I could do that, but it would be require upfront cost that I could not have unless someone very rich would be funding, because what would be easy for Canon with established production, would be somewhat costly and hard but not impossible to come up with by a small startup company. RED is an example of that and I am happy they have succeeded. And I am laughing when I see how RED products run circles about anything else on that market, they are smarter than their competitors on their market despite they don't have the advantage of huge production, logistics, sale etc. organizations of e.g. Canon or Sony. Unlike RED, most startups would have failed in that attempt, and that's the reason why RED is targeting to high end niche and not to consumer. They don't need to sell so many to get their salaries paid, at that price point. Doing that for consumers, would mean much larger up front investments and it would need someone really believing that it will pay off and thinking in unconventional way before nothing would have been produced.


----------

