# Canon Announces The Development Of An Innovative Photography Solution For Live Events



## Canon Rumors Guy (Sep 19, 2019)

> The solution will Enable Remote Operation of Canon’s Interchangeable Lens Cameras in Inaccessible Locations for Photographers
> MELVILLE, NY, September 19, 2019 – Canon U.S.A. Inc., a leader in digital imaging solutions, today announced that its parent company, Canon Inc., is developing a remote-control solution that will allow for operation of the company’s interchangeable-lens cameras. Remote operation of cameras has been growing in popularity among photo agencies and media outlets, as seen in today’s coverage of global sporting and news events. With that growth in mind, Canon is excited to develop a powerful solution that reflects years of testing and feedback from the organizations that will benefit the most from this device.
> 
> The solution, currently under development, utilizes a system that enables the camera’s optical axis to be perpendicular to the device’s axis of revolution. This intuitive alignment will provide users with operational capabilities that feel similar to...



Continue reading...


----------



## criscokkat (Sep 19, 2019)

Bullet time replays coming to an NFL broadcast n your TV soon.


----------



## ethanz (Sep 19, 2019)

That looks as expensive as the 1dx sitting inside it. Cool idea though.


----------



## cayenne (Sep 19, 2019)

Isn't this thing basically the same thing as:
Edelkrone Head Plus....etc

Or any other 3 axis controllable gimble set up?

cayenne


----------



## Kit. (Sep 19, 2019)

Hopefully, it has a well-defined easy to use networking protocol, like CCAPI.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 19, 2019)

I can do exactly the same thing currently with my DJI Ronin-S. If I use a CamRanger (the MkII has just been released for those that are interested) it gives me much fuller camera control than even Canon software does via the WFT.


----------



## miketcool (Sep 19, 2019)

This is the image stabilization that Canon has been working on...


----------



## StoicalEtcher (Sep 19, 2019)

Wow, how big must this be - given the dwarfed size of camera and lens in the second shot!

I guess it won't be too long before no photog is needed at sports/live events - just get a tech to set up the equipment and the picture editor can take the shots they want from his/her desk  

(No, don;t get started on the picture editor's lack of creative eye - they won't like it!)


----------



## ethanz (Sep 19, 2019)

StoicalEtcher said:


> I guess it won't be too long before no photog is needed at sports/live events - just get a tech to set up the equipment and the picture editor can take the shots they want from his/her desk



Yep, we won't need photographers anymore


----------



## SteveC (Sep 19, 2019)

ethanz said:


> Yep, we won't need photographers anymore



Next step, put this all in a cell phone.


----------



## unfocused (Sep 19, 2019)

SteveC said:


> Next step, put this all in a cell phone.


Don't get Harry started.


----------



## LensFungus (Sep 19, 2019)

Best bottle opener ever.


----------



## miketcool (Sep 19, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I can do exactly the same thing currently with my DJI Ronin-S. If I use a CamRanger (the MkII has just been released for those that are interested) it gives me much fuller camera control than even Canon software does via the WFT.



Can you mount a $16,000 telephoto prime and get a precise tracking shot in the wind and rain? This is a solution that can scale to broadcast, not handle a mirrorless and compact zoom.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 19, 2019)

miketcool said:


> Can you mount a $16,000 telephoto prime and get a precise tracking shot in the wind and rain? This is a solution that can scale to broadcast, not handle a mirrorless and compact zoom.


The Ronin S can handle my 1DX MkII's with the 11-24 on, or the 24-70 or 70-200 f2.8's. I don't produce broadcast output and I suspect few here do, I don't use a mirrorless and compact zoom for my professional output either.

But my point holds true, Canon might think this is innovative, many if their customers have been doing similar for years and Canon software sucks when compared to others even when it is third party software controlling Canon cameras.


----------



## Pixel (Sep 20, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> The Ronin S can handle my 1DX MkII's with the 11-24 on, or the 24-70 or 70-200 f2.8's. I don't produce broadcast output and I suspect few here do, I don't use a mirrorless and compact zoom for my professional output either.
> 
> But my point holds true, Canon might think this is innovative, many if their customers have been doing similar for years and Canon software sucks when compared to others even when it is third party software controlling Canon cameras.


Getty has been making these for years. Welcome to the party, Canon.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 20, 2019)

Pixel said:


> Getty has been making these for years. Welcome to the party, Canon.


Indeed, the people who need them have had them for a long time, the low budget people who can use the feature can shoehorn current affordable gear to work (me and many others). Canon are very late to this game and I'd certainly hate to work with their software if everything else they make is anything to go by...


----------



## unfocused (Sep 20, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> ...But my point holds true, Canon might think this is innovative, many if their customers have been doing similar for years and Canon software sucks when compared to others even when it is third party software controlling Canon cameras.



There used to be a saying, "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM."

If you are entrusted with remote camera coverage of the Olympics, NFL, NLB, NHL, etc. and your job depends on it, buying Canon's system and with it, Canon's professional support, is good job security. Yeah, no one on this forum will ever use this, but I'd be willing to bet that television networks, _Sports Illustrated_ and others will be customers, no matter what Canon is charging.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Sep 20, 2019)

StoicalEtcher said:


> Wow, how big must this be - given the dwarfed size of camera and lens in the second shot!
> 
> I guess it won't be too long before no photog is needed at sports/live events - just get a tech to set up the equipment and the picture editor can take the shots they want from his/her desk
> 
> (No, don;t get started on the picture editor's lack of creative eye - they won't like it!)


The thing is the venue or who is hired to be the main media team would most likely own all the photos since i believe they would be the ones setting it up . i guess publications would have to buy the photos then have all the same photos.


----------



## RayValdez360 (Sep 20, 2019)

why are people here acting like this is for them. it seems like something a big company would invest in. it may not be the first thing like this but i guess Canon would send reps to market it to venues and show what advantages it has over competitors. since canon makes cameras i guess they can be sold as an all in one first party unified system.


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 20, 2019)

unfocused said:


> There used to be a saying, "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM."
> 
> If you are entrusted with remote camera coverage of the Olympics, NFL, NLB, NHL, etc. and your job depends on it, buying Canon's system and with it, Canon's professional support, is good job security. Yeah, no one on this forum will ever use this, but I'd be willing to bet that television networks, _Sports Illustrated_ and others will be customers, no matter what Canon is charging.


I'd be willing to bet that the real volume users of this kind of tech, Reuters, Getty and AP, are happy with the systems they have already developed, I remember seeing x,y,z, plane computer controlled heads for top end cameras and lenses with zoom control years ago from these companies for the Olympics.

I'd see the real market for these as rental houses to go out to people with decent budgets that don't do this kind of thing very often.

People like me, low budget but pushing to bring new perspectives, will keep using the gear we have, WiFi enabled gimbals, WFT's and CamRangers.


----------



## Antono Refa (Sep 20, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I'd be willing to bet that the real volume users of this kind of tech, Reuters, Getty and AP, are happy with the systems they have already developed, I remember seeing x,y,z, plane computer controlled heads for top end cameras and lenses with zoom control years ago from these companies for the Olympics.
> 
> I'd see the real market for these as rental houses to go out to people with decent budgets that don't do this kind of thing very often.
> 
> People like me, low budget but pushing to bring new perspectives, will keep using the gear we have, WiFi enabled gimbals, WFT's and CamRangers.



Big players like Reuters and Getty aren't in the business of developing and maintaining this type of system. They were forced into it because there's no off the shelf product. and some of them might be willing to switch to Canon's.


----------



## BillB (Sep 20, 2019)

Antono Refa said:


> Big players like Reuters and Getty aren't in the business of developing and maintaining this type of system. They were forced into it because there's no off the shelf product. and some of them might be willing to switch to Canon's.


Especially if they have Canon's support to back them up.


----------



## cayenne (Sep 20, 2019)

unfocused said:


> There used to be a saying, "Nobody ever got fired for buying IBM."



Based on my IT experience (my day job)....these days, if anyone on my team so much as uttered *two* of those three letters, I'd can their a$$ immediately.

Ugh, IBM is almost as bad as CA, they buy a company and proceed to destroy what used to be good, workable, dependable software.

Ok...rant mode off.


Carry on with fun camera discussions!!

C


----------



## privatebydesign (Sep 20, 2019)

Antono Refa said:


> Big players like Reuters and Getty aren't in the business of developing and maintaining this type of system. They were forced into it because there's no off the shelf product. and some of them might be willing to switch to Canon's.


Maybe, but as they already have the systems operators along with the software, firmware and hardware all I was saying was I think Canon are too late to the party for the big users, the 2012 Olympics was the first one I noticed very heavy common use of controlled 'robot' remotes so they must have been testing much earlier than that. Obviously Canon believe there is a market, just as there must be for their $40,000 monitors, I just don't see the Reuters, AP, Getty market dropping what they have, it costs a lot more than the sticker price to change over stuff like this, and they all have experts with years of expertise with their already robust and effective current solutions. To me that seems like a hard sell.

However rental houses who don't have the custom gear and want to offer an off the shelf solution seems like a comparatively easy sell.

None of this changes my second point, Canon software sucks. I find the robustness of the WFT's very good, their connection durability and range as well as their integrated weather sealed form factor works well, the limitation is their software which doesn't give you a fraction of the control any third party camera control software does, it is also very clunky, unintuitive and slow. Why do you have to move to a different screen to view images from camera control? Stuff like that makes whatever hardware they have much less effective.


----------



## Kit. (Sep 20, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> None of this changes my second point, Canon software sucks. I find the robustness of the WFT's very good, their connection durability and range as well as their integrated weather sealed form factor works well, the limitation is their software which doesn't give you a fraction of the control any third party camera control software does, it is also very clunky, unintuitive and slow. Why do you have to move to a different screen to view images from camera control? Stuff like that makes whatever hardware they have much less effective.


If their cameras are controlled via CCAPI and their gimbals are controlled via a similar RESTful protocol, you could write the software in JavaScript and run it in your favorite browser.


----------



## Antono Refa (Sep 20, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> Maybe, but as they already have the systems operators along with the software, firmware and hardware all I was saying was I think Canon are too late to the party for the big users, the 2012 Olympics was the first one I noticed very heavy common use of controlled 'robot' remotes so they must have been testing much earlier than that.



I agree, and at least some of them would be sticking to their existing investment. But just as those companies aren't into developing cameras, lenses, image processing software, etc, I bet some will decide they don't want to keep investing into robotic camera controllers, and will phase to Canon's.



privatebydesign said:


> Obviously Canon believe there is a market, just as there must be for their $40,000 monitors



And Canon might be wrong.



privatebydesign said:


> I just don't see the Reuters, AP, Getty market dropping what they have, it costs a lot more than the sticker price to change over stuff like this, and they all have experts with years of expertise with their already robust and effective current solutions. To me that seems like a hard sell.



I doubt even Canon expects them to switch at the drop of a hat. My basic claim is, long term, those companies don't want to keep developing, manufacturing, and maintaining robotic camera controllers, so Canon has a fair chance to get some of them to switch, as long as they can make the product attractive in terms of functionality, usability, price, etc.


----------



## Cochese (Sep 20, 2019)

privatebydesign said:


> I'd be willing to bet that the real volume users of this kind of tech, Reuters, Getty and AP, are happy with the systems they have already developed, I remember seeing x,y,z, plane computer controlled heads for top end cameras and lenses with zoom control years ago from these companies for the Olympics.
> 
> I'd see the real market for these as rental houses to go out to people with decent budgets that don't do this kind of thing very often.
> 
> ...



The major difference here, is those rigs look fragile.With wires/ wiring exposed and nothing protecting the camera itself, they'd be a hazard on the sideline. That chunky slab Canon has in the picture fully encompasses the camera, concealing it from damage, with only the lens left exposed.Which, any enterprising person with some tape and a plastic sheet could easily protect. 

In fact, not a single item mentioned in this thread looks even close to the robustness of what Canon seems to be offering.


----------



## stevelee (Sep 21, 2019)

cayenne said:


> Based on my IT experience (my day job)....these days, if anyone on my team so much as uttered *two* of those three letters, I'd can their a$$ immediately.
> 
> Ugh, IBM is almost as bad as CA, they buy a company and proceed to destroy what used to be good, workable, dependable software.


That was a saying in the '80s and '90s that explained why Apple was *******.


----------



## LDS (Sep 21, 2019)

ethanz said:


> Yep, we won't need photographers anymore



Just look at this:






Changing fashion retail photography - Canon Europe - Canon Europe


Discover how StyleShoots 'photography machines' with Canon cameras are revolutionising online fashion stores’ ability to shoot thousands of products per day.




www.canon-europe.com


----------



## ethanz (Sep 21, 2019)

LDS said:


> Just look at this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Wow, it is happening. Another victim of the robots. That machine must cost a ton though. How do you get access to the Canon SDK? It sounds interesting. Canon isn't innovative at all


----------



## Kit. (Sep 21, 2019)

ethanz said:


> How do you get access to the Canon SDK?


By registering as a Canon developer (for free).


----------



## Arod820 (Sep 22, 2019)

ethanz said:


> Yep, we won't need photographers anymore


This has been getting rid of cameramen for years sadly. Robots don’t need health insurance, vaction/sick days, or lunch breaks.


----------

