# Patent: Canon RF mount modular CINE camera appears in drawings



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 20, 2019)

> An RF mount cinema camera of some kind is likely an inevitable evolution in Canon’s ecosystem when such a camera will appear is unknown at this time. I imagine the lens lineup needs to be a bit bigger before we see this sort of camera come to market.
> Canon News has uncovered a patent that shows such a camera in great detail. The patent itself is related to reducing the size of the forced air cooling smaller and more efficient, therefore reducing the size of the camera.
> As you’ll see below, the technical drawings for this camera are quite detailed. It shows a very modular camera design, it looks to be about the size of the XC series of cameras. We believe the Cinema EOS lineup will be moving to more modular designs as we’ve seen in the recent EOS C500 Mark II.
> 
> ...



Continue reading...


----------



## masterpix (Sep 20, 2019)

It looks like a medium format camera, dual memory card slots etc. Maybe Canon is finaly moving toward the medium format?


----------



## EduPortas (Sep 20, 2019)

Had to happen sooner or later.


----------



## SecureGSM (Sep 20, 2019)

masterpix said:


> It looks like a medium format camera, dual memory card slots etc. Maybe Canon is finaly moving toward the medium format?


Nuh, video cam. MF for video? Slim chances.


----------



## sanj (Sep 20, 2019)

The lens line up is good enough for most video productions. The 70-200 is around the corner. After 200mm it gets into very specialized video production.


----------



## Quackator (Sep 20, 2019)

People keep forgetting the EF->RF mount adapters and more so the beauty of the built-in vari-ND filter in one of those adapters. More lens line-up than Canon's? You are trolling us, are you? EF lenses perform on RF bodies with adapter at least as good as on native EF bodies - some even better than that.

The importance of ND filters for video can't be emphasized enough.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Sep 20, 2019)

Quackator said:


> People keep forgetting the EF->RF mount adapters and more so the beauty of the built-in vari-ND filter in one of those adapters. More lens line-up than Canon's? You are trolling us, are you? EF lenses perform on RF bodies with adapter at least as good as on native EF bodies - some even better than that.
> 
> The importance of ND filters for video can't be emphasized enough.


cine cameras have built in nd filters already


----------



## adamaoc (Sep 20, 2019)

Definitely looking forward to something like this. Love the Cinema line of cameras but also loved the form factor of the XC cameras. Something in-between is still a big want in my life.


----------



## EduPortas (Sep 20, 2019)

Yep, a hypothetical "C-RF-X00" would include ND filtration, a feature in almost every Canon videocamera already.

An intriguing model, for sure.


----------



## PureClassA (Sep 20, 2019)

masterpix said:


> It looks like a medium format camera, dual memory card slots etc. Maybe Canon is finaly moving toward the medium format?


Nah. That would require Canon to develop yet another entirely new line of glass in short order. Not happening.


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Sep 20, 2019)

masterpix said:


> It looks like a medium format camera, dual memory card slots etc. Maybe Canon is finaly moving toward the medium format?


I know what you mean - it has a very MF style-look to it - and would be very interesting.

However, as PureClassA says, there would need to be a new lens design to cover the MF sensor, and RF isn't going to do that. (Not quite sure what the image circle of a non-tilted/shifted TS lens is though...)


----------



## PureClassA (Sep 20, 2019)

StoicalEtcher said:


> I know what you mean - it has a very MF style-look to it - and would be very interesting.
> 
> However, as PureClassA says, there would need to be a new lens design to cover the MF sensor, and RF isn't going to do that. (Not quite sure what the image circle of a non-tilted/shifted TS lens is though...)



I think we would see Canon develop a MF stills camera plus a healthy family of glass well before they ever went to a dedicated MF Cine line. That said, Canon has never seemed interested (at least up this point) in delving into the MF world at all.


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Sep 20, 2019)

PureClassA said:


> I think we would see Canon develop a MF stills camera plus a healthy family of glass well before they ever went to a dedicated MF Cine line.


Yes - agreed. 
Just for clarification, I was't intending to refer to an MF cine camera - I was thinking along the lines of an MF stills camera - I could perhaps have been clearer.  
Cheers


----------



## BrightTiger (Sep 20, 2019)

In related news, Ricoh, Canon and others will be offering the ultimate in modular cameras by providing individual components that consumers can build their own bespoke unit*.
Proposed modular components
_* Some assembly required. Not for children under 3 due to choking hazards._


----------



## sfeinsmith (Sep 20, 2019)

Look like Canon copied Hasselblad appearance.


----------



## Architect1776 (Sep 20, 2019)

Quackator said:


> People keep forgetting the EF->RF mount adapters and more so the beauty of the built-in vari-ND filter in one of those adapters. More lens line-up than Canon's? You are trolling us, are you? EF lenses perform on RF bodies with adapter at least as good as on native EF bodies - some even better than that.
> 
> The importance of ND filters for video can't be emphasized enough.



These great cameras are why the people who complain about Canon not making their still cameras into video cameras are really clowns who are clueless how to use real video cameras. If you want video then get a real video that runs rings around still cameras trying to be video as well. If you do you tube you are doing video so learn what a real video camera is and how to use it.
Still cameras with a bit of video are fine but to do REAL video they will never be REAL video cameras. Just still cameras with basic video capability.
Thank you Canon for understanding the consumers as 99% have no clue about real video and those that do get the Canon real video cameras and do real productions, not home movies or downright boring you tube videos of them being narcissists.


----------



## MadScotsman (Sep 20, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> These great cameras are why the people who complain about Canon not making their still cameras into video cameras are really clowns who are clueless how to use real video cameras. If you want video then get a real video that runs rings around still cameras trying to be video as well. If you do you tube you are doing video so learn what a real video camera is and how to use it.
> Still cameras with a bit of video are fine but to do REAL video they will never be REAL video cameras. Just still cameras with basic video capability.
> Thank you Canon for understanding the consumers as 99% have no clue about real video and those that do get the Canon real video cameras and do real productions, not home movies or downright boring you tube videos of them being narcissists.



Pretty much. The little YouTube and photo forum amature crybullies that cry like little b... er... sissies didn't understand that Canon was protecting their product line and therefore their profit margin. Something they have historically been very good at. Even in the face of the global pressures they are all feeling. Let 'em cry. If you want pro video buy pro video.


----------



## bgoyette (Sep 20, 2019)

masterpix said:


> It looks like a medium format camera, dual memory card slots etc. Maybe Canon is finaly moving toward the medium format?


Given the the 2 XLR ports on the back, the CinemaEos style (side mounted) dials and buttons, the handle, cheese plate and the CinemaEos/Arri rosette. I think this is very safely what it purports to be - a video camera. I think it's interesting that they are using the LP-E6 battery. That might not bode well for this thing having a premium feature set.


----------



## Joel C (Sep 22, 2019)

This better be the xc20 with interchangeable lens I've been waiting for.


----------



## Profit007 (Sep 23, 2019)

Guys, look at the size of the SD card slot, and LP battery sliding into the side of it, compared to the overall dimensions. This is smaller than my old film medium format cameras. 

Also, if you look at all of the drawings on the Japanese patent website, the body detailed to illustrate their air cooling pathways appears to have a FIXED lens, not interchangeable. :-(

For example in the attached you can see the ribbon possibly from a sensor attached near the back of the lens, or more likely the ribbon is actually to drive the lens. 
But there is no apparent lens mount and no lens release button on the front of the body, in any of the drawings. :-(


----------



## canonnews (Sep 23, 2019)

Profit007 said:


> Also, if you look at all of the drawings on the Japanese patent website, the body detailed to illustrate their air cooling pathways appears to have a FIXED lens, not interchangeable. :-(


you know that's a good point. I think I saw what I wanted to see when I was reading through the patent.


----------



## CarlMillerPhoto (Sep 23, 2019)

This looks great - like Canon is actually innovating and listening to video users - but sadly my bet is that this has a poor performing 1" sensor. That's fine for ENG but doesn't cut it for anything else really. And given the modular (read: cinema focused) design here that'll be an odd decision. My XC10 just can't keep up IQ wise with much of anything anymore but I still love its ease of use. I'm also not holding my breath that Canon can figure out how to give us better IQ and DR in a small sensor _a la _what Black magic did with the super16 & m4/3 sensors in their pocket cameras. However, if this turns out to be Super35 (even with a fixed lens) it'll be an instant buy from me. Canon, please make it super35/APS-C.


----------



## Joel C (Sep 24, 2019)

CarlMillerPhoto said:


> This looks great - like Canon is actually innovating and listening to video users - but sadly my bet is that this has a poor performing 1" sensor. That's fine for ENG but doesn't cut it for anything else really. And given the modular (read: cinema focused) design here that'll be an odd decision. My XC10 just can't keep up IQ wise with much of anything anymore but I still love its ease of use. I'm also not holding my breath that Canon can figure out how to give us better IQ and DR in a small sensor _a la _what Black magic did with the super16 & m4/3 sensors in their pocket cameras. However, if this turns out to be Super35 (even with a fixed lens) it'll be an instant buy from me. Canon, please make it super35/APS-C.


If they gave us a super 35 with rf mount even, I'd be all over that to. I been waiting patiently for the xc20. It's run out, guess I'll just buy a used c100.


----------



## transpo1 (Sep 24, 2019)

MadScotsman said:


> Pretty much. The little YouTube and photo forum amature crybullies that cry like little b... er... sissies didn't understand that Canon was protecting their product line and therefore their profit margin. Something they have historically been very good at. Even in the face of the global pressures they are all feeling. Let 'em cry. If you want pro video buy pro video.



Actually, without admitting any of your insults, we who have urged Canon to reach feature video feature parity with their competitors certainly _do_ understand that Canon's been protecting their Cinema EOS line-- and _that's why_ we've been complaining. I'm concerned you know absolutely nothing about the history and legacy of DSLR video and the reasons it's been beneficial to the industry as a whole. But judging by the maturity of your comments, I suspect you don't really know much of anything at all.


----------



## transpo1 (Sep 24, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> These great cameras are why the people who complain about Canon not making their still cameras into video cameras are really clowns who are clueless how to use real video cameras. If you want video then get a real video that runs rings around still cameras trying to be video as well. If you do you tube you are doing video so learn what a real video camera is and how to use it.
> Still cameras with a bit of video are fine but to do REAL video they will never be REAL video cameras. Just still cameras with basic video capability.
> Thank you Canon for understanding the consumers as 99% have no clue about real video and those that do get the Canon real video cameras and do real productions, not home movies or downright boring you tube videos of them being narcissists.



Wow, the idiocy and ignorance of some of the comments on this forum are beyond the pale...I'm not sure I know where to start there's so much bull#%& here. But I'll take a shot at parsing it. 

1) First of all, you're completely ignoring the segment of people who want to make photos AND videos and don't have $10-15k to spend on a true cinema camera. 2) Second, in a world where smartphone cameras are getting better and better and shooting better and better video, doesn't it make sense for an ILC to offer comparable video features to your latest smartphone? My thought is this is a pretty great marketing tool, otherwise Canon wouldn't have bothered to offer concessions like 4K in their latest cameras. 3) Third, what cameras do you think aspiring filmmakers buy before they become working professionals? They buy stills cameras that do video because they can use them for photos, too. Those beginning filmmakers start buying Sony cameras now...and graduate more often to FS7s, not to Cinema EOS. It's called creating a halo around your brand and getting buy in from an early age. Canon still has the most profits in the still camera industry but for those who are interested in video as well...they've lost quite a bit of resonance. I produce in New York City, and if a production is not shooting Arri, and not shooting RED, it's shooting Sony. 4) Fourth, just because you're insecure about video features in your photography camera doesn't mean you have to be completely ignorant and vitriolic in your comments about the features other people want in theirs. And 5) Fifth, just keep in mind that video is only 24 still frames per second- so in effect, your precious still photography camera just gets a much higher frame rate when video is implemented well. 

I hope this clarifies things for you. You're welcome.


----------



## Kit. (Sep 24, 2019)

transpo1 said:


> Second, in a world where smartphone cameras are getting better and better and shooting better and better video, doesn't it make sense for an ILC to offer comparable video features to your latest smartphone?


My Pixel 3a doesn't support recording in 24p! Google is *******!


----------



## MadScotsman (Sep 24, 2019)

transpo1 said:


> Actually, without admitting any of your insults, we who have urged Canon to reach feature video feature parity with their competitors certainly _do_ understand that Canon's been protecting their Cinema EOS line-- and _that's why_ we've been complaining. I'm concerned you know absolutely nothing about the history and legacy of DSLR video and the reasons it's been beneficial to the industry as a whole. But judging by the maturity of your comments, I suspect you don't really know much of anything at all.



Yep. Hit a nerve. 

Keep running from Canon post to Canon post hooting and flinging poo. You keep making sure EVERY comment section has the obligatory "NO IBIS!" "ONE CARD SLOT!" and of course "NO 4K!" crybaby post.

You can try to sell yourself as just concerned about "the history and legacy of DLSR video" (my eyes rolled so far back in my head I saw my BRAIN) but your only real purpose is to damage the brand. Which just makes you a whiny little troll.

And EVERYONE knows it. 

As someone that's heavily invested in the Canon eco-system, I want them to continue to make the decisions that are keeping them profitable and to continue to ignore schpeck-nerds that live in their moms bashements and talk like they gotta mouf fulla schpit.


----------



## canonnews (Sep 24, 2019)

transpo1 said:


> _do_ understand that Canon's been protecting their Cinema EOS line-- and _that's why_ we've been complaining.



you complain here. what good does that do? Hint. None.

and PS. Canon's own CEO's state that you're wrong. this is not the reason at all. What's strange about this, is if you were actually involved in the industry you'd realize that the use cases for CINI line and DSLR / ILC line are two entirely separate entities. I mean they aren't even run by the same division anymore btw. Unless of course you're involved deep in Canon Japan Inc's R&D and marketing research teams, and if you are, PM me 

and what's even weirder you're complaining about it in a patent that CLEARLY identifies why Canon has a difficult time putting class leading capable video in sealed DSLR's...


----------



## cayenne (Sep 24, 2019)

Kit. said:


> My Pixel 3a doesn't support recording in 24p! Google is *******!



That's sad....my iPhone shoots 24fps and many other frame rates.


----------



## Architect1776 (Sep 24, 2019)

transpo1 said:


> Wow, the idiocy and ignorance of some of the comments on this forum are beyond the pale...I'm not sure I know where to start there's so much bull#%& here. But I'll take a shot at parsing it.
> 
> 1) First of all, you're completely ignoring the segment of people who want to make photos AND videos and don't have $10-15k to spend on a true cinema camera. 2) Second, in a world where smartphone cameras are getting better and better and shooting better and better video, doesn't it make sense for an ILC to offer comparable video features to your latest smartphone? My thought is this is a pretty great marketing tool, otherwise Canon wouldn't have bothered to offer concessions like 4K in their latest cameras. 3) Third, what cameras do you think aspiring filmmakers buy before they become working professionals? They buy stills cameras that do video because they can use them for photos, too. Those beginning filmmakers start buying Sony cameras now...and graduate more often to FS7s, not to Cinema EOS. It's called creating a halo around your brand and getting buy in from an early age. Canon still has the most profits in the still camera industry but for those who are interested in video as well...they've lost quite a bit of resonance. I produce in New York City, and if a production is not shooting Arri, and not shooting RED, it's shooting Sony. 4) Fourth, just because you're insecure about video features in your photography camera doesn't mean you have to be completely ignorant and vitriolic in your comments about the features other people want in theirs. And 5) Fifth, just keep in mind that video is only 24 still frames per second- so in effect, your precious still photography camera just gets a much higher frame rate when video is implemented well.
> 
> I hope this clarifies things for you. You're welcome.



No it does not. I am not sure about being insecure. You have a very insecure response and vitriolic. I love what I have and it does what I expect it to do and what purpose it was purchased for. As stated if you are shooting video then get a video and grab stills from that not the other way around as you suggest. Logically that is ass backwards. You get great video and on the side a few stills as needed pretty simple concept lost on so many spec junkies.  There is a lot more to America than NYC.


----------



## skp (Sep 25, 2019)

Wait, am I missing something here? What makes people think that this lens is interchangeable, let alone an RF mount? This to me looks like another fixed lens XC camera.


----------



## Etienne (Sep 25, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> These great cameras are why the people who complain about Canon not making their still cameras into video cameras are really clowns who are clueless how to use real video cameras. If you want video then get a real video that runs rings around still cameras trying to be video as well. If you do you tube you are doing video so learn what a real video camera is and how to use it.
> Still cameras with a bit of video are fine but to do REAL video they will never be REAL video cameras. Just still cameras with basic video capability.
> Thank you Canon for understanding the consumers as 99% have no clue about real video and those that do get the Canon real video cameras and do real productions, not home movies or downright boring you tube videos of them being narcissists.



It's always the guy who knows absolutely nothing about video that lectures videographers. 

Idiocy.


----------



## Architect1776 (Sep 26, 2019)

Etienne said:


> It's always the guy who knows absolutely nothing about video that lectures videographers.
> 
> Idiocy.



An observer who sees lunacy.


----------



## Etienne (Sep 26, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> An observer who sees lunacy.


Forever the arrogance


----------



## Architect1776 (Sep 27, 2019)

Etienne said:


> Forever the arrogance


----------



## transpo1 (Oct 3, 2019)

MadScotsman said:


> Yep. Hit a nerve.
> 
> Keep running from Canon post to Canon post hooting and flinging poo. You keep making sure EVERY comment section has the obligatory "NO IBIS!" "ONE CARD SLOT!" and of course "NO 4K!" crybaby post.
> 
> ...



Haha, are you okay? Did you have a heart attack? Let us know if I need to call 911. 

In other words, it looks like I was the one who hit a nerve.

I've been on this forum for 8 years and while no one here likes my posts about 4K, EVERYBODY knows Canon has some catching up to do- in other words, that I was right. 

And since you accuse me of being what you said in the above quote, I would assume that's exactly what *you* are- a lonely fanboy who bought one Canon camera and who lives in your mother's basement. 

I suggest you get a good anger management therapist and then go see the world so you can learn something, take the diapers off, and become a proper adult. 

Cheers


----------



## transpo1 (Oct 3, 2019)

Architect1776 said:


> No it does not. I am not sure about being insecure. You have a very insecure response and vitriolic. I love what I have and it does what I expect it to do and what purpose it was purchased for. As stated if you are shooting video then get a video and grab stills from that not the other way around as you suggest. Logically that is ass backwards. You get great video and on the side a few stills as needed pretty simple concept lost on so many spec junkies.  There is a lot more to America than NYC.



Definitely a lot more to America to NYC. On that, we can't agree more. But as one of the largest markets of video production, it's a great gauge as to what's trending and what's not. 

And since I do own a RED, I frequently do that, but at heart, I'm a huge Canon fan- or at least want to be- so am rooting for them to implement richer video offerings in their cameras so I can come back and purchase their bodies again. My Fuji X-T3 largely accomplishes this now when I'm on the road, but I'd love to come back to the fold. Maybe in 2020, Canon will put out a camera body that has 2020 video specs that compete with the 5D Mark II, which is the Canon I started on. 

And logically, your statement only makes sense if you put more emphasis on video than you put on stills. I'm a perfectionist, so I want great stills and great video in the same body. Right now, it's Fuji (and sometimes RED), but I hope Canon can catch up and implement great video features that make me want to buy again in the future. Would love to make use of all that excellent Canon glass I still own. 

Always fun doing business with you- Cheers


----------



## transpo1 (Oct 3, 2019)

Kit. said:


> My Pixel 3a doesn't support recording in 24p! Google is *******!



Haha, that's silly. The Pixel phones are already *******.


----------

