# Canon Launches New Flagship XF705 Professional Camcorder Featuring 4K Video Recording at 60P/4:2:2/10-Bit



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 12, 2018)

> MELVILLE, N.Y., September 12, 2018 – Canon U.S.A. Inc., a leader in digital imaging solutions, today announced the new flagship model for the Company’s XF-series professional camcorders, the XF705. The camcorder features 4K (3840 x 2160) video shooting enabling users to record high-image quality at 60p/4:2:2/10-bit/HDR1 video to on-board SD cards. Ideal for broadcast and video production applications in addition to capturing video content at events and concerts, the 4K camcorder meets the needs of users who require high-quality video capture and more efficient video production workflows.
> “The ability to capture high-quality video on-the-go in a compact and lightweight form factor is extremely valuable to videographers of all skill levels,” said Kazuto Ogawa, president and chief operating officer, Canon U.S.A., Inc. “This camcorder was designed to help professionals take their productions to the next level with 4K video recording and a wide-range of advanced features.”...



Continue reading...


----------



## Scott Brown (Sep 12, 2018)

Looks like a fantastic little camera and in my opinion Canon will likely sell many many more of these than they ever will Cinema EOS cameras. Just cant fathom why it has taken so long to release!

We have used many many cameras over the years but arguably from business standpoint, our Canon XF305 has made us more money than any other. Ours is 10 years old - it has never been serviced and has never once let us down. It has been baked in deserts, it has been dropped (not intentionally), it has been soaked on many many occasions and it has never failed. Only criticism I have is its low light performance and associated noisy pictures.

For the haters out there - yes, you may look at this camera and think it's disappointing. It's certainly not sexy and won't deliver cinematic footage but that wasn't Canon's brief here.

Remember what this camera is built for. Run and gun broadcast television documentary and news production. It's a tough work-horse, not designed to compete with the current generation of shallow DOF large sensor cinema style cameras. 

Need to get a shot very quickly, guaranteed to be in focus, properly exposed, shot to full broadcast standard? You'd grab this before you ever would a C200 or C300 Mk2...or at least I would )

The BBC had input into this cameras development as they did with its predecessor the XF305 which became almost a industry standard for documentary production along with Sony's EX1.

The new XF-HEVC codec could be a game changer as it will allow you to shoot 4K at 60 Mb/s, just slightly higher than the current 50 Mb/s broadcast standard HD codecs. This will allow easy re-framing of footage for HD delivery.

We now have two cameras ready to do battle for the docs/news camera crown - it's going to be the Canon XF-705 v the Sony PXW-Z280.

Anyone for a shoot-out?


----------



## nitram (Sep 12, 2018)

I think it is important to note that the sensor size is 1inch and that the resolution is pretty much exactly 4K which allows for the 1:1 readout which currently results in the crop in the 5Dmk4 and R bodies. If Canon released the R with an 8MP sensor, I doubt stills photographers would be happy. Thus, I am pretty sure that the firm is sensor-limited in terms of the readout of the 5Dmk4-class sensor. While it does have more capable sensors like on the C700FF, the price is way higher. If it were just a 'not enough processing power' to downsample to 4K, then Canon would have placed a second Digic8. Then again, this would have created an unacceptable level of power draw thus reducing operational autonomy. Design is always finding a balance between several factors. The initial R will probably be great for lots of amateurs. It is not designed for the most demanding or niche use cases, however.


----------



## fullstop (Sep 12, 2018)

6990 not so bad. All you 4k/60 whiners go buy it and leave our stills cameras in peace.


----------



## Scott Brown (Sep 12, 2018)

> The new XF-HEVC codec could be a game changer as it will allow you to shoot 4K at 60 Mb/s, just slightly higher than the current 50 Mb/s broadcast standard HD codecs. This will allow easy re-framing of footage for HD delivery.



Oops, just realised I should have said 160 Mb/s here, so approx. 3 x HD data rate


----------



## razorzec (Sep 12, 2018)

I have a feeling that HLG and XF-HEVC will eventually come to an EOS R series camera. While CinemaRaw Lite will become an exclusive Cinema EOS feature and one of the main feature differentiators between it and the EOS R.


----------



## Josh Leavitt (Sep 12, 2018)

Nice camcorder. I'm just hoping Canon will release the C100 mk3 soon and drop some of the XF705 tech inside it. I don't need 4k yet, I'm happier with oversampled 1080p and the super35 sensor. But I'd like to see super slow-motion capabilities for 1080p in the C100 mk3 by getting frame rates of 240fps. Dual UHS-II card slots would be nice. The 10-bit 4:4:2 recording would be nice upgrade. And an RF mount would be pretty awesome too.


----------



## Etienne (Sep 12, 2018)

I thought the lens would be brighter on this level of camera. f/2.8-4.5 is not that great


----------



## Etienne (Sep 12, 2018)

fullstop said:


> 6990 not so bad. All you 4k/60 whiners go buy it and leave our stills cameras in peace.



What a perfect example of "I don't know anything about video" from a photo-snob


----------



## transpo1 (Sep 12, 2018)

fullstop said:


> 6990 not so bad. All you 4k/60 whiners go buy it and leave our stills cameras in peace.



Actually, I think $7K for 4K 60p 2018 is rather expensive. But this seems like a great tool for video broadcasters and run and gun folks and I’m glad that people who need this kind of tool now have it. I haven’t used this type of cam in 8 years, so it’s not for me. 

Canon is in the minority of OEMs by not putting high quality 4K video into its high end prosumer stills cameras so that would make you in the minority of not wanting a hybrid solution.


----------



## WilliamJ (Sep 12, 2018)

Reading more into specs... it has 5 axis IBIS!

Sure signs of good things to come for future R bodies??


----------



## Bambel (Sep 12, 2018)

I have to admit that i have no clue about video cameras.. but: has the "kink" in the body something to do with ergonomics when you sit it on your shoulder? It looks rather strange..


----------



## RayValdez360 (Sep 12, 2018)

Scott Brown said:


> Looks like a fantastic little camera and in my opinion Canon will likely sell many many more of these than they ever will Cinema EOS cameras. Just cant fathom why it has taken so long to release!
> 
> We have used many many cameras over the years but arguably from business standpoint, our Canon XF305 has made us more money than any other. Ours is 10 years old - it has never been serviced and has never once let us down. It has been baked in deserts, it has been dropped (not intentionally), it has been soaked on many many occasions and it has never failed. Only criticism I have is its low light performance and associated noisy pictures.
> 
> ...


I have yet to see anyone with these types of cameras. I was actually going to ask, who buy these.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Sep 12, 2018)

WilliamJ said:


> Reading more into specs... it has 5 axis IBIS!
> 
> Sure signs of good things to come for future R bodies??


It states stabilization for the lens not the sensor.


----------



## TMHKR (Sep 12, 2018)

fullstop said:


> 6990 not so bad. All you 4k/60 whiners go buy it and leave our stills cameras in peace.


They can't. YouTube "professionals" own their mind.


----------



## Bekippe (Sep 12, 2018)

1" DPAF sensor? Unless i'm mistaken that is new, and exciting for the PowerShot G series future


----------



## fullstop (Sep 12, 2018)

transpo1 said:


> Canon is in the minority of OEMs by not putting high quality 4K video into its high end prosumer stills cameras so that would make you in the minority of not wanting a hybrid solution.



no logic in your sentence. I bet only 10% of stills camera purchasers really would want hybrid stills/video capability IF THEY HAD TO PAY FOR IT. They are just free-riders who want it for free. I am rather happy that Canon denies them their wish to a large extent and f's them over with crippled video stuff in stills cameras.


----------



## bhf3737 (Sep 12, 2018)

Bekippe said:


> 1" DPAF sensor? Unless i'm mistaken that is new, and exciting for the PowerShot G series future


The 1" sensor with DPAF has already been used in XF400-405 video cameras. 
Besides other features, I guess the codec is new in this release.


----------



## EduPortas (Sep 12, 2018)

Most of the cost of this model is linked to its massive "L" lens. No other Canon ENG camera uses this particular type of glass. 

Shame they are no longer using a three sensor system, like the older XF300. 
Apparently, that's what really made that camera standout (and its particular "L" zoom, of course)

It's also worth noting that this is the SDI model with a bunch of other accoutrements 
for studio crews. We should see a slightly less expensive model without the SDI connectors, as per usual.

It's expensive, but, like most Canon products, it creates it's own niche. There's
no other Canon product like this out there and professionals know this.


----------



## transpo1 (Sep 12, 2018)

fullstop said:


> no logic in your sentence. I bet only 10% of stills camera purchasers really would want hybrid stills/video capability IF THEY HAD TO PAY FOR IT. They are just free-riders who want it for free. I am rather happy that Canon denies them their wish to a large extent and f's them over with crippled video stuff in stills cameras.



Haha. I’ve got news for you: they are already paying for it by buying Sony FF MILCs, Nikon D850s and Panasonics and Fujis. Canon is only hurting itself in the long run by not staying competitive with this hybrid capability. 

So, definitely no logic in your statement and a lot of biased emotion. It’s clear you’re insecure with adding capabilities to your cameras that you don’t know how or care to use. It really doesn’t subtract any stills capability from your photography, so again, no logic to your statement here.


----------



## Scott Brown (Sep 12, 2018)

RayValdez360 said:


> I have yet to see anyone with these types of cameras. I was actually going to ask, who buy these.


Hi Ray,

These cameras are used extensively by run and gun style documentary shooters and also by news networks. 

The XF305 was originally designed with heavy input from the BBC here in the UK and the camera became almost an industry standard in the UK for documentary production. Camera's such as Sony's FS7 and Canon's C300 and a whole generation of large sensor shallow DOF cameras have taken over much of this work BUT and it's a BIG BUT, for run and gun ob doc filming these cameras are tricky to shoot with and you see this on screen with a large amount of out of focus material.

We specialise in ob doc filming, mostly for the BBC and prefer to use smaller cameras that are less scary for the people we are filming and allow us to shoot for long periods to time using low cost media. The most important thing for us is the ability to capture footage as it happens and for this reason, we tend to avoid large sensor cameras and prefer to use small hand-held cameras such as the XF705 or the Sony Z280.

Our local news station for example has just purchased 25 Sony PXW-Z280's and the BBC in the UK will buy large quantities of the new Canon and Sony cameras.

That is the low answer - short answer is loads of folks )


----------



## fullstop (Sep 12, 2018)

Not only do I not care for video recording, it is worse than that: in many ways it is an obstacle for optimal stills shooting. I have no problem with SOME cameras being hybrid video/stills. I am massively opposed to ALL stills cameras being stuffed with video sh*t.

And the video whiners shall f*cking go and buy f*cking video cams. Like this one here. Or any other, I don't care.


----------



## bhf3737 (Sep 12, 2018)

WilliamJ said:


> Reading more into specs... it has 5 axis IBIS!
> 
> Sure signs of good things to come for future R bodies??


Canon USA site mentions that it has "electronic stabilization" not IBIS. 
EOS-R already has electronic stabilization.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Sep 12, 2018)

Scott Brown said:


> Hi Ray,
> 
> These cameras are used extensively by run and gun style documentary shooters and also by news networks.
> 
> ...


I know who its for. i was saying who actually buys it these days. I figured someone was going to say for TV stuff or networks


----------



## RayValdez360 (Sep 12, 2018)

fullstop said:


> Not only do I not care for video recording, it is worse than that: in many ways it is an obstacle for optimal stills shooting. I have no problem with SOME cameras being hybrid video/stills. I am massively opposed to ALL stills cameras being stuffed with video sh*t.
> 
> And the video whiners shall f*cking go and buy f*cking video cams. Like this one here. Or any other, I don't care.


 It's shame you are stuck in the past like that. how does a camera having video features hurt someone that takes photos. simply dont use the video mode.


----------



## fullstop (Sep 12, 2018)

RayValdez360 said:


> how does a camera having video features hurt someone that takes photos. simply dont use the video mode.



video recording hinders 1. optimal stills IQ and 2. optimal stills shooting capabilities in many ways.

* starting with sensor design itself = not optimized for best possible STILLS IQ, but for running full-bore 4k video capture for 29 minutes on end = very different set of design objectives
* audio cr*p on board: total waste. stereo mics, extra mic jack, extra headphone jack, audio pre-amp/s and whathavenot. Sucking battery power and precious CPU cycles away from AF and stills capabilities. I would like that money either shaved off camera price or applied towards optimal stills IQ and stills shooting capabilities (eg "AI powered", eye controlled truly amazing AF system)
* all sorts of unnecessary clutter in and on camera: eg. totally unneeded marked in red "Video rec" button wasting precious real estate on camera body and often in places where it gets in may way when shooting video
* menu system cluttered with video sh*t. cannot even deselect it totally, so it disappears. Oh no, stills shooters "have to live with it 24/7" and sift through those god*mn video cr*p menu settings when moving between menu sub-pages
* all sorts of video-connectors, not needed for stills, causing more doors and additional cost to wheatherseal the body. 

I want NONE of it. At least ONE "pure stills" mirrorfree FF camera in lineup. And please not the one priced at 6990.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Sep 12, 2018)

fullstop said:


> video recording hinders 1. optimal stills IQ and 2. optimal stills shooting capabilities in many ways.
> 
> * starting with sensor design itself = not optimized for best possible STILLS IQ, but for running full-bore 4k video capture for 29 minutes on end = very different set of design objectives
> * audio cr*p on board: total waste. stereo mics, extra mic jack, extra headphone jack, audio pre-amp/s and whathavenot. Sucking battery power and precious CPU cycles away from AF and stills capabilities. I would like that money either shaved off camera price or applied towards optimal stills IQ and stills shooting capabilities (eg "AI powered", eye controlled truly amazing AF system)
> ...


 its funny the first thing I was going to mention was the record button. so ok the biggest and most logical thing you complain about is the size of the camera increrasing slightly due to hardware related to video. I dont understand how video messes with IQ without some type of technically facts. I think you got it backwards. The cinema line is the one where the IQ is dedicated to video with a low MPix sensor.


----------



## fullstop (Sep 12, 2018)

RayValdez360 said:


> so ok the biggest and most logical thing you complain about is the size of the camera increrasing slightly due to hardware related to video.



nope. My main complaint is that I am forced to pay for and accept unwanted, stills-performance impeding video recording stuff in [virtually] every stills camera.


----------



## EduPortas (Sep 12, 2018)

fullstop said:


> video recording hinders 1. optimal stills IQ and 2. optimal stills shooting capabilities in many ways.
> 
> I want NONE of it. At least ONE "pure stills" mirrorfree FF camera in lineup. And please not the one priced at 6990.



The big N already has a camera for you, but it has a mirror :] 

In all seriousness, camera purists say the DF delivers a very good image and NO video whatsoever.


----------



## bhf3737 (Sep 13, 2018)

fullstop said:


> nope. My main complaint is that I am forced to pay for and accept unwanted, stills-performance impeding video recording stuff in [virtually] every stills camera.



Being a bit more precise, there are some common technologies shared between mirrorless still and video cams, such as AF, focus tracking, histogram, focus peaking, and zebras. But there are some essential features for video cameras (such as: codecs, logs, luma waveform, multiple audio channels, triggers, false color, vector scope, timecode, etc.) that are not necessarily needed in still only cameras. Some of these features (such as codecs and multi-channel audio) are very CPU, memory, bandwidth, power demanding and perhaps costly.
Some companies, like Canon, focus mainly on essential still features but also offer a minimum subset of consumer-oriented implementation of the video features in a DSLR/mirrorless form factor. Some other companies, like Panasonic and Sony, try to market their cameras with the video features to attract more enthusiasts.
But today, there is no hybrid camera that has the full set and professional implementation of all the still and video features (e.g. they never put a high quality codec there). I guess there will never be a true hybrid, and even if it happens, it will be quite expensive.
As for the cost concerns you mentioned, no need to worry if you buy cameras designed and marketed with the focus on photo features. When you buy a DSLR/mirrorless camera you pay for the common essential photo features, anyway, and those added video-oriented features are usually nothing more than cheap gimmicks.


----------



## RunAndGun (Sep 13, 2018)

Scott Brown said:


> Hi Ray,
> 
> These cameras are used extensively by run and gun style documentary shooters and also by news networks.
> 
> ...



After reading your first post, I was about to ask who and where, also. Because I almost NEVER see Canon "handycams" out in the wild here in the US and definitely not at the network level. I have one production client that has one or two for producers. Their "real camera" inventory for photogs is a mix of C300, C300 II, Amira and VariCams.


----------



## fullstop (Sep 13, 2018)

EduPortas said:


> In all seriousness, camera purists say the DF delivers a very good image and NO video whatsoeve



Nikon Df disqualifies for me for several reasons, mainly its botched, "pseudo-retro" user interface, the slapping mirror inside, its bulk and the very poor price/value ratio given its rather pedestrian specs.

generally i'd like to see things the other way round: less "hybrid" cameras and more uncompromised stills cameras.

nobody would ask why the XF705 video cam does not capture 50 MP stills at 10 fps with superb AF tracking. every stills camera released - eg EOS R - triggers lots of video-whining, "why no 4k/60, no 1080/120, no better codec, no this no that video cr*p. i find that totally ridiculous.


----------



## waldi72 (Sep 13, 2018)

fullstop said:


> Nikon Df disqualifies for me for several reasons, mainly its botched, "pseudo-retro" user interface, the slapping mirror inside, its bulk and the very poor price/value ratio given its rather pedestrian specs.
> 
> generally i'd like to see things the other way round: less "hybrid" cameras and more uncompromised stills cameras.
> 
> nobody would ask why the XF705 video cam does not capture 50 MP stills at 10 fps with superb AF tracking. every stills camera released - eg EOS R - triggers lots of video-whining, "why no 4k/60, no 1080/120, no better codec, no this no that video cr*p. i find that totally ridiculous.


Audio features are not useless for still image cameras. I really like voice memo for still pictures in 1D X series Canon Camera. I wish next 7D have it along with ability to download to card your C1-C3 settings.


----------



## fullstop (Sep 13, 2018)

waldi72 said:


> I really like voice memo for still pictures in 1D X series Canon Camera.


you are the second person I ever hear this from. 
To me any sort of audio is totally useless in stills cameras. But no prob if voice notes are in 1D series, I will never buy one.


----------



## Sibir Lupus (Sep 13, 2018)

Etienne said:


> I thought the lens would be brighter on this level of camera. f/2.8-4.5 is not that great



It's a 25.5 mm–382.5 mm (35mm equivalent) lens that isn't the size of your head. So yeah, that's actually pretty good. I guess they cold have just made it a consistent F/4, but then you'd loose the F/2.8 capability on the wide end.


----------



## Etienne (Sep 13, 2018)

Sibir Lupus said:


> It's a 25.5 mm–382.5 mm (35mm equivalent) lens that isn't the size of your head. So yeah, that's actually pretty good. I guess they cold have just made it a consistent F/4, but then you'd loose the F/2.8 capability on the wide end.


It's the same lens spec as the much smaller XF405. 
I would have preferred a stop faster and accept the additional weight. This is not a small / light camera already, that's the XF405. The brighter lens would have made a big difference.
This camera is still quite interesting to me.


----------



## ykn123 (Sep 13, 2018)

RayValdez360 said:


> It's shame you are stuck in the past like that. how does a camera having video features hurt someone that takes photos. simply dont use the video mode.


Wanting to have top notch stills features without paying for 4K video crap (if you dont use it because you are not in the video business at all) is by far not living in the past - it make's a lot of sense from a photographers perspective - but it will not happen anymore because such is life. However it leads to a bunch of youtube nerds blaming cameras like the R that otherwise (without video) would be simply great stills cameras with superior glass (EF or R - no matter) , great colour science , great AF, ergonomics, usability features and innovations like the protected sensor in the R (from dust sucking) , the control ring, the MN-bar, the menues, ....) - i would purchase it any day - if i do video i simply grab another camera thats made for it.


----------



## RunAndGun (Sep 13, 2018)

Sibir Lupus said:


> It's a 25.5 mm–382.5 mm (35mm equivalent) lens that isn't the size of your head. So yeah, that's actually pretty good. I guess they cold have just made it a consistent F/4, but then you'd loose the F/2.8 capability on the wide end.



Most of these handycams start to iris ramp almost immediately after zooming in from the bottom-end, whereas most "real" ENG or even cine lenses that ramp(and all high mag/zoom ratio lenses do) don't start to ramp until around the top 1/3 or 1/4 of the range. Kind of apples-to-oranges, but my 17-120 doesn't ramp until after 90mm, which is exactly 75% through the range, so the widest aperture spec actually means something.


----------



## Dantana (Sep 13, 2018)

RunAndGun said:


> After reading your first post, I was about to ask who and where, also. Because I almost NEVER see Canon "handycams" out in the wild here in the US and definitely not at the network level. I have one production client that has one or two for producers. Their "real camera" inventory for photogs is a mix of C300, C300 II, Amira and VariCams.



I used a very similar SD camera from Canon, back in the day, to shoot behind the scenes footage when I worked at a company that designed concert sets. Construction, rehearsals, sometimes show footage. I would much rather have something like this as a dedicated video rig for just that kind of doc footage than trying to use a DSLR for that purpose. Sometimes having shallow depth of field is a curse rather than a blessing. The dedicated cine cameras are great, but way more camera and complication (and cost) than needed for the purpose.


----------



## RunAndGun (Sep 13, 2018)

Dantana said:


> I used a very similar SD camera from Canon, back in the day, to shoot behind the scenes footage when I worked at a company that designed concert sets. Construction, rehearsals, sometimes show footage. I would much rather have something like this as a dedicated video rig for just that kind of doc footage than trying to use a DSLR for that purpose. Sometimes having shallow depth of field is a curse rather than a blessing. The dedicated cine cameras are great, but way more camera and complication (and cost) than needed for the purpose.



I hate these type of form factor cameras, for most things, but I wholeheartedly agree that you don't need large sensor cameras for everything. And a lot of times large sensor cams are a hinderance(especially shooting video with a DSLR). My favorite camera, to this day, is still my 2/3" P2 VariCam with 13x4.5 ENG lens. It's like Ken Rockwell says about how a camera should work, it just gets out of your way and lets you shoot. I went pretty much the entire month of August not picking up a large sensor camera. I shot pretty much 100% with my VariCam and it was SO NICE. People(mostly the young "kids") look down on 2/3" ENG cameras today, but they don't know what they're missing.


----------



## Dantana (Sep 13, 2018)

RunAndGun said:


> I hate these type of form factor cameras, for most things, but I wholeheartedly agree that you don't need large sensor cameras for everything. And a lot of times large sensor cams are a hinderance(especially shooting video with a DSLR). My favorite camera, to this day, is still my 2/3" P2 VariCam with 13x4.5 ENG lens. It's like Ken Rockwell says about how a camera should work, it just gets out of your way and lets you shoot. I went pretty much the entire month of August not picking up a large sensor camera. I shot pretty much 100% with my VariCam and it was SO NICE. People(mostly the young "kids") look down on 2/3" ENG cameras today, but they don't know what they're missing.



Everything has its place. They wouldn't make this camera if there wasn't a market for it.

I've heard a lot of good things about similar Panasonics, though I have never had the pleasure to use them. I used a similar setup Sony HD camera for the same kind of purpose at a different company and it did its job well, though I was more used to the Canon setup. I don't get to run around with cameras at my current gig, so it's been a while.


----------



## Cinto (Sep 14, 2018)

RayValdez360 said:


> It's shame you are stuck in the past like that. how does a camera having video features hurt someone that takes photos. simply dont use the video mode.


Well... I imagine that getting super high data rates from the sensor are mostly(high frame rate cameras excepted) a product of the focus on video. Maybe we are seeing more RnD spent on data rates rather than no-bayer sensors because of the need to meet video specs?


----------



## Etienne (Sep 15, 2018)

fullstop said:


> Not only do I not care for video recording, it is worse than that: in many ways it is an obstacle for optimal stills shooting. I have no problem with SOME cameras being hybrid video/stills. I am massively opposed to ALL stills cameras being stuffed with video sh*t.
> 
> And the video whiners shall f*cking go and buy f*cking video cams. Like this one here. Or any other, I don't care.


To paraphrase: "wa wa wah wah wah ... the world must revolve around me, me,me. go to he11 bad world"


----------



## fullstop (Sep 15, 2018)

Etienne said:


> To paraphrase: "wa wa wah wah wah ... the world must revolve around me, me,me. go to he11 bad world"



no. it is just a very reasonable suggestion that imaging gear makers should offer products for majority markets (stills images) too, not only for tiny niches (hybrid video +stills). in their own best interest.

you can rest assured that it is not only me, but a vast majority of Canon imaging customers who only are interested in the best possible stills equipment and give a damn about capturing video.

camera phone snapshotters are a different kind. they mostly take cr*ppy snapshots and cr*poy snapshot videos too. it does not mean that people buying dedicated imaging gear also are equally hell-bent on stills + video capture.


----------



## Talys (Sep 17, 2018)

fullstop said:


> you can rest assured that it is not only me, but a vast majority of Canon imaging customers who only are interested in the best possible stills equipment and give a damn about capturing video.



I'm one of the people who is totally uninterested in video on my stills camera. As I've said before, I don't mind all the video stuff, as long as it has no negatives from a stills perspective -- for example, I don't want to pay more, I don't want un-reprogrammable buttons that I'll never use that are in the way, and I certainly don't want an ergonomics penalty.

That said, if adding video capability can make my stills camera _cheaper_, I'm all for the cost savings as long as it's something I can effectively ignore.

I know that sounds a little counter-intuitive, but in the long run, it isn't really. A stills camera with video will have broader appeal, and if it increases the number of units sold, that will decrease the minimum price that Canon can sell the camera for and turn whatever profit it wants to make It also reduces the number of SKUs, which makes it easier on retailers to keep stock and all that.

At the end of the day, it will all come down to manufacturing price. If Canon can make the stills camera and add video functionality _at no extra cost_, and is willing to sell it_at no extra premium_, that's a win for everyone, I think.

There is also the possibility of video feature forcing my stills camera to a better stills camera; for example, if it forces Canon to move to UHS-II (for better write speed) or better DIGIC processor, that may then be snappier for stills photography.


----------



## fullstop (Sep 17, 2018)

@Talys - mostly in agreement, but got a somewhat different take on the following bullets:

1. any higher DIGIC performance is instantly gobbled up by and diverted off to video stuff (higher framerates, higher level codecs) and associated audio stuff instead of giving us e.g. even better and much more intelligent (stills) AF performance ... or IBIS ... or ... whatever other useful for stills capture items.

2. number of SKUs is evidently [FACT] of no concern to Canon (or Nikon) whatsoever.
* As long as they each are having far more than a dozen SKUs in the retail channel of current and last generations APS-C mirrorslappers in various "body-only" and "bundled with various kit lens/es".
* and for Canon even multiplied by 3 utterly unnecessary differently "continental"-branded SKUs: * Rebel / Kiss / xxxD * ... ffs!

So ... offering a few additional "uncompromised by video stuff, geared for best-possible stills performance camera" SKUs and at the same time cutting down all those "pure marketing sh*t SKUs" would actually lighten logistical efforts and cost of sales ... considerably.


----------

