# Canon will announce a new Cinema EOS camera ahead of NAB [CR3]



## Canon Rumors Guy (Feb 18, 2020)

> We have confirmed that Canon will be announcing a new Cinema EOS camera ahead of NAB in April.
> The new camera will follow the same form factor as the recently released Canon Cinema EOS C500 Mark II and will have a user interchangeable EF and PL mount.
> This is likely going to be the follow-up to the Canon Cinema EOS C300 Mark II and not the coming 8K Canon Cinema EOS camera, though I wouldn’t be shocked to finally see a development announcement for the 8K camera.
> We hope to nail down the specifications for the new camera shortly.



Continue reading...


----------



## pj1974 (Feb 18, 2020)

Oh goodie!! I expect it'll have killer features.. Canon's currently on a roll!!


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 18, 2020)

Full Frame I wonder? Seems Canon is moving in that direction with Cinema EOS. I watched a video yesterday cost Comparing the new C500-2 to a complete Red setup. $16k vs almost $50k. Amazing how much value Canon is cramming into these professional pieces. The guy was essentially selling his Red systems because the cost of ownership and ease of use plus quality of Canon was too good not to


----------



## Kjsheldo (Feb 18, 2020)

Come on, Canon. Make it a C500II without the 6K and with an RF Mount. That’s it. 
- Full frame
- 4k raw and all the 4k 10-bit in full frame
- RF Mount 
- add in 120fps in 4k

Compete directly with the FX9, but with raw and 120fps and of course better Canon image. $10 - $12k

and make it 15-20% smaller and lighter.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 18, 2020)

Kjsheldo said:


> Come on, Canon. Make it a C500II without the 6K and with an RF Mount. That’s it.
> - Full frame
> - 4k raw and all the 4k 10-bit in full frame
> - RF Mount
> ...


Not until you see Canon start remaking their Cine-Primes into RF... which im not sure is terribly imminent. RF L glass is I believe all FBW right? That’s a no-no for cinema shooting as much pro level shooting is done with manual focus pull. Otherwise the EF-Cinema glass is all manual anyway. If I was gonna use non-cinema glass on these bodies, i would definitely want EF -L and not RF-L just because of the focus pulling issue


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Feb 18, 2020)

The codecs and resolution on the current cameras are good. I'd just like to see decent ergonomics, full frame, and IBIS.


----------



## MaxDiesel (Feb 18, 2020)

Any news on some new additions to the CN-E line of affordable Cine Zooms. Love the 18-80mm and 70-200mm but would like to see a T3.1 or F2.8 equivalent even if the reach will most probably be shorter.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 18, 2020)

I'm actually hoping to see an C100 III. Unless they decided to kill that model line with the C200. But I think a C100 III with Full Frame and no slo-mo (4K24 and 4K30) would be a great seller for around $5000. OR - give us up to 4K60 like the C200 but keep it crop. Then let the C300 and C500 lines do FF. Plenty ways Canon could go with this.

Then again, I'm kinda thinking Canon may just scrap it and give is the long awaited a7s competitor in its place (sort of).


----------



## Kjsheldo (Feb 18, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> Not until you see Canon start remaking their Cine-Primes into RF... which im not sure is terribly imminent. RF L glass is I believe all FBW right? That’s a no-no for cinema shooting as much pro level shooting is done with manual focus pull. Otherwise the EF-Cinema glass is all manual anyway. If I was gonna use non-cinema glass on these bodies, i would definitely want EF -L and not RF-L just because of the focus pulling issue



Yes, I understand this argument, but I know lots and lots of people who shoot with C200 and C300 II, as well as Sony FS5 and FS7, and very few of them shoot with cinema lenses with true, hard stops manual focus lenses. And the new FBW lenses are WAAYYY better than they were a few years ago. 

Also, with the new *linear focusing* choice on most mirrorless cameras, it's a non-issue. I focus all of the time with mirrorless FBW lenses and never care their isn't a distance scale.

The RF-Mount is important because all of their full-frame RF zooms have stabilization, which is HUGE for doc, journalist, tv, and small production company crews - plus the RF mount easily adapts everything else out there. 

Probably will be EF mount, so maybe something on the lower end of the cinema lineup (C100 III or C200 II) will be the first to get it.


----------



## Arod820 (Feb 18, 2020)

Where’s the Camera from those sexy patent blueprints from a while back? The one with an RF mount that looked modular and gimbal friendly. I’m holding out for that one. I’ve got the Eos R and the af is incredible but it only holds one card and has limited recording capability. A full frame cine camera that I could slap on the 28-70 F2 and have af with professional audio would be monumental.
Even if it’s an aps-c sensor to keep cost down I could use the sigma Art Zooms with an EF adapter. I want an FS-5 killer more than an FX-9.


----------



## Kjsheldo (Feb 18, 2020)

Arod820 said:


> Where’s the Camera from those sexy patent blueprints from a while back? The one with an RF mount that looked modular and gimbal friendly. I’m holding out for that one. I’ve got the Eos R and the af is incredible but it only holds one card and has limited recording capability. A full frame cine camera that I could slap on the 28-70 F2 and have af with professional audio would be monumental.
> Even if it’s an aps-c sensor to keep cost down I could use the sigma Art Zooms with an EF adapter. I want an FS-5 killer more than an FX-9.



Totally agree. Maybe the Red Komodo is that instead.

But C100 III (same size or smaller) that is more modular, has XLRs on the body, internal NDs, with (the now required for any new cinema camera) 10-bit 4k up to 60fps, with an RF Mount would be an instant buy for me.


----------



## Architect1776 (Feb 18, 2020)

Kjsheldo said:


> Come on, Canon. Make it a C500II without the 6K and with an RF Mount. That’s it.
> - Full frame
> - 4k raw and all the 4k 10-bit in full frame
> - RF Mount
> ...



What is wrong with the EF mount? Also you can use PL mount lenses on Canon cameras natively. Also you forget that Canon has a large line-up of EF Cinema lenses that are incredible.
Sony is very limited with just E lenses which are limited in range and options where EF lenses have a huge variety and add PL lenses it is mind boggling what options are available to you.


----------



## Kjsheldo (Feb 18, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> What is wrong with the EF mount? Also you can use PL mount lenses on Canon cameras natively. Also you forget that Canon has a large line-up of EF Cinema lenses that are incredible.
> Sony is very limited with just E lenses which are limited in range and options where EF lenses have a huge variety and add PL lenses it is mind boggling what options are available to you.



As I mentioned above, for a full-frame doc cinema camera, you could put a 24-70mm f2.8 lens on it and be good 95% of the time. But you also want lens stabilization. The EF version doesn't have it. The 16-35mm f2.8 doesn't either. Whereas the RF Mount versions do. The Sigma EF does, but that stabilization is pretty awful. And that lens is huge.


----------



## bgoyette (Feb 18, 2020)

If Canon was really out to win this market they would be trying to squeeze the FX9 from below. The C500II (which I own) is their new flagship, but I think they will get beat on sales by the FX9 simply based on price (the cameras are really targeted at different users, but as they came out at the same time, Sony seems to be winning from a "chatter" standpoint. The problem is the differences between these cameras are getting so slim, but perhaps we could see an FX9 clone (FF but 4k output) with some of canon's new AF tech (from the 1dxmarkIII) combined with a price tag at 10k. Would likely savage the new C500II as well, which is why I don't think it will happen. More likely that we will see something on the lower end...a C200 mark II...5.9k S35 $7k better codecs. Done.


----------



## Kjsheldo (Feb 18, 2020)

bgoyette said:


> If Canon was really out to win this market they would be trying to squeeze the FX9 from below. The C500II (which I own) is their new flagship, but I think they will get beat on sales by the FX9 simply based on price (the cameras are really targeted at different users, but as they came out at the same time, Sony seems to be winning from a "chatter" standpoint. The problem is the differences between these cameras are getting so slim, but perhaps we could see an FX9 clone (FF but 4k output) with some of canon's new AF tech (from the 1dxmarkIII) combined with a price tag at 10k. Would likely savage the new C500II as well, which is why I don't think it will happen. More likely that we will see something on the lower end...a C200 mark II...5.9k S35 $7k better codecs. Done.



Yea - that's true. If Canon came out with a full-frame C300 III as a 4k only camera but offered all the specs you would think it would have (internal raw up to 60fps + 10-bit codecs), that could really hurt the C500 II, since the 5.9k on that camera would only be used in productions that can deal with and afford the file sizes. 

But, if it doesn't have internal raw or is not full-frame, how is it above the C200, which has internal raw 4k up to 60fps? 

I wouldn't be surprised (but I would be disappointed), if it was sort of a combo of the C300 II and C200 - a Super35 4K-only camera with internal raw up to 60fps + all of the 10-bit codecs that the C200 was missing. So, basically a C200 with a firmware update. Hopefully not, but that's what I'm guessing. 

That's why I think they should make it RF Mount, full-frame, 4k-only, internal raw, 60fps, all 10-bit codecs. Want an EF mount or 5.9k raw? C500 II. Don't need 5.9k raw or want the newer, more powerful RF mount? C300 III.


----------



## cpreston (Feb 18, 2020)

I think the C300 III will be the 8K S35 camera that shoots 4K. I know some people would assume the 8K model would be the flagship model, but an 8K S35 camera would still be a step down from a full frame 5.9K C500 II. The 8K S35 sensor is just a better way to capture 4K footage than the current 4K sensor. It is analogous to the way the original C300 captured 1080p off of a 4K sensor.


----------



## padam (Feb 18, 2020)

Sony will put more pressure on with the FX6, so it makes sense to make it EF-mount FF focusing on 10-bit 4:2:2 internal codecs, and possibly call it C400 instead of the C300 Mark III.


----------



## jvillain (Feb 18, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> Full Frame I wonder? Seems Canon is moving in that direction with Cinema EOS. I watched a video yesterday cost Comparing the new C500-2 to a complete Red setup. $16k vs almost $50k. Amazing how much value Canon is cramming into these professional pieces. The guy was essentially selling his Red systems because the cost of ownership and ease of use plus quality of Canon was too good not to



Red has real problems. They get completely owned on the top end by ARRI and they are fighting off both Canon and Black Magic on the bottom end. When you ask why Red it is pretty hard to come up with an answer. For the first year ever I am looking forward to NAB more than any of the camera shows.


----------



## Architect1776 (Feb 18, 2020)

Kjsheldo said:


> As I mentioned above, for a full-frame doc cinema camera, you could put a 24-70mm f2.8 lens on it and be good 95% of the time. But you also want lens stabilization. The EF version doesn't have it. The 16-35mm f2.8 doesn't either. Whereas the RF Mount versions do. The Sigma EF does, but that stabilization is pretty awful. And that lens is huge.



I doubt PL Pro lenses have it nor do the Canon cine lenses either.
Apparently those hyper expensive lenses do phenomenal work some how.


----------



## bsbeamer (Feb 18, 2020)

If the Olympics still happen, Canon will have an 8K available for at least network ENG usage, if not more. What form factor that actually comes in is up for debate. I'd expect something like the rest of the line, possibly with a "brick" attachment for 8K.


----------



## PureClassA (Feb 18, 2020)

jvillain said:


> Red has real problems. They get completely owned on the top end by ARRI and they are fighting off both Canon and Black Magic on the bottom end. When you ask why Red it is pretty hard to come up with an answer. For the first year ever I am looking forward to NAB more than any of the camera shows.


I am seeing less and less reason for Red in their current state. It's precisely as you said. ARRI still owns the top end (and you can't even BUY them outright unless you are a MAJOR hollywood production house and even then they are leased more often) and then Canon and BM at the other end eating their lunch. Red can't get away with charging $2500 for a 1TB RegMag much longer and honestly surprised they have this long.


----------



## bgoyette (Feb 18, 2020)

Kjsheldo said:


> But, if it doesn't have internal raw or is not full-frame, how is it above the C200, which has internal raw 4k up to 60fps?



It's interesting when you sit on forums where people are discussing the C500II and the FX9 daily, how many of them aren't interested in the 5.9k image at all, but what they want is the 4k oversampled. This provides a cleaner image, and makes the camera "tier 1" as it's a "true" 4k image --Which both the C500II and the FX9 do, and the C200 doesn't. (the c500 adds the 5.9k 60p raw output, which is really a big thing, but I'm not hearing a lot of excitement from the riffraff about it). Many of them also do not want Raw, they want a high quality compressed codec (something Canon has only put in it's upper level cameras (c300,500,700), but Sony has enabled in the FS7 and FX9, because that's a standard deliverable in the "owner-operator" market. If canon is interested in that chunk of the market, they have to compete directly with Sony.


----------



## Arod820 (Feb 18, 2020)

bgoyette said:


> It's interesting when you sit on forums where people are discussing the C500II and the FX9 daily, how many of them aren't interested in the 5.9k image at all, but what they want is the 4k oversampled. This provides a cleaner image, and makes the camera "tier 1" as it's a "true" 4k image --Which both the C500II and the FX9 do, and the C200 doesn't. (the c500 adds the 5.9k 60p raw output, which is really a big thing, but I'm not hearing a lot of excitement from the riffraff about it). Many of them also do not want Raw, they want a high quality compressed codec (something Canon has only put in it's upper level cameras (c300,500,700), but Sony has enabled in the FS7 and FX9, because that's a standard deliverable in the "owner-operator" market. If canon is interested in that chunk of the market, they have to compete directly with Sony.


For some reason Canon seems to not be aware of Sony’s existence. Sony has been beating Canon to the punch on almost everything (except color science) but CNon refuses to compete directly with anyone.


----------



## Arod820 (Feb 18, 2020)

Architect1776 said:


> What is wrong with the EF mount? Also you can use PL mount lenses on Canon cameras natively. Also you forget that Canon has a large line-up of EF Cinema lenses that are incredible.
> Sony is very limited with just E lenses which are limited in range and options where EF lenses have a huge variety and add PL lenses it is mind boggling what options are available to you.


There’s nothing wrong with the EF line, but RF is the future and it’s more capable. You can use adapters (EF with drop in filters) for almost any lens. The RF bodies come with free adapters already. The only reason I can think of for continuing the C line with EF is Canon’s cinema lens line.


----------



## bgoyette (Feb 18, 2020)

Arod820 said:


> For some reason Canon seems to not be aware of Sony’s existence. Sony has been beating Canon to the punch on almost everything (except color science) but CNon refuses to compete directly with anyone.


 I don't think thats true in any way. Canon has technologies that lead the industry and Sony has technologies that lead the industry. Canon has always been a patient, plodding competitor, and their market share in most segments of the business generally proves that out. Their roll-out of the R system has been particularly interesting as they are building interest by releasing truly remarkable glass first...making the eventual "killer" body a must-have once they get it ready. Canon will dominate in the mirrorless sector sooner than later. Video is a different story, as it's been Sony's to lose for a very long time. But it's hard not to see the C200 as a very interesting first shot, followed by the very attractive all rounder C500II, as an even stronger volley, in the direction of Sony, Red and others...Canon's professional video division has always been a small player, but they seem to be interested now in making up for lost time. Time will tell.


----------



## felipeolveram (Feb 18, 2020)

I have so much anxiety right now


----------



## SonarSonic (Feb 18, 2020)

As a dedicated C100 mk ii user of 4 years, I would really welcome a C100 mk iii. Although don't think they can really upgrade it without undermining the C200.
Although if they could made a C100 comparable camera with an even smaller form factor I would really welcome that as a single shooter, but in likelihood it'll be the C300 mk iii.


----------



## jayboy (Feb 18, 2020)

I really hope this will be a RF mount camera, or an interchangeable lens mount camera design that would allow for RF, EF and PL. It would require a body overhaul so they can get the RF mount close enough to the sensor. I think that's the way to go onwards. Canon has made clear their future is RF. It would be a shame to not be able to use the wonderful RF lenses on their next cinema camera. A lot of us are/will be switching to the RF ecosystem, especially with the release of the R5.

I would also love (and need!) to see more compressed raw options. The ~3:1 ratio we have right now creates too much data.
Then hopefully we'll get updated sensor tech in there that rivals more closely with what ARRI and RED are doing in terms of dynamic range, i.e. *true* ~14.5 stops of DR


----------



## rontele7 (Feb 18, 2020)

I personally think an RF mount C300 would be a big hit, preferably S35. 

I work in documentary and unscripted TV, so for my world, FF is viewed as a bit of hindrance due to lack of available FF cine-zooms that don't weigh 10lbs or that don't cost $30k+. At the other end of the spectrum you have stills lenses, which are fine for certain cases, but there's really not much in the middle.

Anyway, I also think the RF mount would be a great move for Canon, because you can easily adapt EF & PL lenses to it. Best of all worlds. 

And of course, the RF lenses released so far look truly fantastic, and better than their Sony equivalents, so that's a big plus too if you want to have a really simple camera package. That new RF 24-105 would be a killer documentary lens, especially paired with the ultra portable RF 70-200 for interviews and sports work.

When you consider that the R5 will have some great video features, then having an R5 as your B-cam for gimals, etc., and an RF C300 as your A-cam, that would really put Canon back in favor for a lot of shooters. At least that is what I think!


----------



## RunAndGun (Feb 19, 2020)

PureClassA said:


> I am seeing less and less reason for Red in their current state. It's precisely as you said. *ARRI still owns the top end (and you can't even BUY them outright unless you are a MAJOR hollywood production house and even then they are leased more often)* and then Canon and BM at the other end eating their lunch. Red can't get away with charging $2500 for a 1TB RegMag much longer and honestly surprised they have this long.




Incorrect. The only camera you can't buy is the 65, everything else is available for sale, such as the Amira, Mini, Mini LF and every other version and variant of Alexa. And don't say only production and rental houses buy them. I know lots of individuals with Amira's and Alexa's.


----------



## mariosk1gr (Feb 19, 2020)

As of me I wish for a new c100/c200 rf mount camera. My c100 mark ii is already 5 years old. It’s time for a refresh and that would be amazing timing for RF mount as an entry level cinema camera. Hope never dies...


----------



## Arod820 (Feb 19, 2020)

RunAndGun said:


> Incorrect. The only camera you can't buy is the 65, everything else is available for sale, such as the Amira, Mini, Mini LF and every other version and variant of Alexa. And don't say only production and rental houses buy them. I know lots of individuals with Amira's and Alexa's.


You can get a used Amira on eBay these days for less than a C500ii, kinda makes you think!


----------



## Architect1776 (Feb 19, 2020)

Arod820 said:


> There’s nothing wrong with the EF line, but RF is the future and it’s more capable. You can use adapters (EF with drop in filters) for almost any lens. The RF bodies come with free adapters already. The only reason I can think of for continuing the C line with EF is Canon’s cinema lens line.



You are right about the RF mount.
I just was saying the EF mount is well established in the Cinema cameras and the cinema lenses. Is there any advantage to the RF seeing as the cinema already have built in ND etc I believe.
But if they want to change, I have no heartburn over that either.


----------



## Kjsheldo (Feb 19, 2020)

mariosk1gr said:


> As of me I wish for a new c100/c200 rf mount camera. My c100 mark ii is already 5 years old. It’s time for a refresh and that would be amazing timing for RF mount as an entry level cinema camera. Hope never dies...



hoping that’s where they go. The C100 would be a great first RF camera. Small, compact with 10-bit 4k up to 60fps. Doesn’t need raw, just a great, solid small doc camera.


----------



## bandido (Feb 19, 2020)

Crossing my fingers for a Canon EOS C100 MK III with RF mount.


----------



## RunAndGun (Feb 19, 2020)

Arod820 said:


> You can get a used Amira on eBay these days for less than a C500ii, kinda makes you think!



Oh yeah. And original Alexa’s are dirt cheap, with some now going for ~$6-$7K or less.


----------



## Kjsheldo (Feb 19, 2020)

Yes. Should be an RF mount base but with full interchangeable mounts to EF or PL. Easy to add on more length to a bolted on adapter. RED has been doing it for years on their cameras. 

Come on, Canon. I want an RF Mount cinema camera to use those lenses on nowwww.


----------



## jayboy (Feb 19, 2020)

rontele7 said:


> Anyway, I also think the RF mount would be a great move for Canon, because you can easily adapt EF & PL lenses to it. Best of all worlds.
> 
> And of course, the RF lenses released so far look truly fantastic, and better than their Sony equivalents, so that's a big plus too if you want to have a really simple camera package. That new RF 24-105 would be a killer documentary lens, especially paired with the ultra portable RF 70-200 for interviews and sports work.
> 
> When you consider that the R5 will have some great video features, then having an R5 as your B-cam for gimals, etc., and an RF C300 as your A-cam, that would really put Canon back in favor for a lot of shooters. At least that is what I think!



Looks like we posted at about the same time.  You're definitely not alone, a lot of us want a RF mount video/film camera from Canon. 
I'm also very curious about what the R5 will be able to do video wise and if indeed it could be used as a B cam. (hoping for some flavor of raw) That's why a RF cine camera is a no brainer, especially if you want it to work hand in hand with a mirrorless B cam. Same native lenses, same cards, same color, AF, etc.


----------



## jayboy (Feb 19, 2020)

rontele7 said:


> I work in documentary and unscripted TV, so for my world, FF is viewed as a bit of hindrance due to lack of available FF cine-zooms that don't weigh 10lbs or that don't cost $30k+. At the other end of the spectrum you have stills lenses, which are fine for certain cases, but there's really not much in the middle.



Oh and I think a 6K FF sensor would be the perfect choice because you can then go 4K S35 by using a crop of the sensor, use your S35 lenses etc. But then you'd have FF capabilities if you need it for FF image characteristics, greater resolution for better downsampling, or to give you crop options in post, or stabilization headroom. So really there are no downsides to FF cause it's more flexible. Only downside is probably higher price


----------



## Kjsheldo (Feb 19, 2020)

jayboy said:


> Looks like we posted at about the same time.  You're definitely not alone, a lot of us want a RF mount video/film camera from Canon.
> I'm also very curious about what the R5 will be able to do video wise and if indeed it could be used as a B cam. (hoping for some flavor of raw) That's why a RF cine camera is a no brainer, especially if you want it to work hand in hand with a mirrorless B cam. Same native lenses, same cards, same color, AF, etc.



EXACTLY. One mount, one set of lenses, same color, similar or same IQ, same codec, etc. Seems like nobody gets this, but all of those things are HUGE on a video project. Annoying when the EOS R doesn't have DCI 4K, which should be easy enough.

Give me some consistency across the models and I'll buy one cinema camera and one mirrorless camera. Or I just won't buy either and buy somewhere else. That's not cannibalizing yourself.


----------



## jayboy (Feb 20, 2020)

Yep! Hopefully Canon gets it now. I think they might have ! We'll see. 

If their new sensors have higher dynamic range and shooting raw would get you reeeeal close to DR of Alexa or RED, that would be BIG! 
Then they'd only need to figure out how to offer higher compression ratios to reduce data rates on video raw. Perhaps there's a workaround to RED's patent, cause I don't really see them paying RED a licensing fee for compressed raw. Although that would be fantastic stepped on their pride a little.


----------



## RunAndGun (Feb 20, 2020)

jayboy said:


> Yep! Hopefully Canon gets it now. I think they might have ! We'll see.
> 
> If their new sensors have higher dynamic range and shooting raw would get you reeeeal close to DR of Alexa or RED, that would be BIG!
> Then they'd only need to figure out how to offer higher compression ratios to reduce data rates on video raw. *Perhaps there's a workaround to RED's patent, cause I don't really see them paying RED a licensing fee for compressed raw*. Although that would be fantastic stepped on their pride a little.



Perhaps there is. Perhaps that’s why Canon has internal Raw Lite and RED has a new camera coming with an RF lens mount...


----------



## Kjsheldo (Feb 20, 2020)

RunAndGun said:


> Perhaps there is. Perhaps that’s why Canon has internal Raw Lite and RED has a new camera coming with an RF lens mount...



Yea, seems like there is some patent swapping between the two. RF Mount isn't an open mount like the EF Mount, but there it is on the Red Komodo. Same with Canon batteries and also the Komodo will also have autofocus, which may also be some of Canon's tech. In return, Canon got internal raw, but maybe only up to a compression ratio of 3:1 or 4:1 (like C200 and C500 II). But, needs to be closer to 8:1 or 11:1 to have manageable file sizes for docs, small team shoots, indies, etc.


----------



## jvillain (Feb 20, 2020)

jayboy said:


> Yep! Hopefully Canon gets it now. I think they might have ! We'll see.
> 
> If their new sensors have higher dynamic range and shooting raw would get you reeeeal close to DR of Alexa or RED, that would be BIG!
> Then they'd only need to figure out how to offer higher compression ratios to reduce data rates on video raw. Perhaps there's a workaround to RED's patent, cause I don't really see them paying RED a licensing fee for compressed raw. Although that would be fantastic stepped on their pride a little.



Canon could always adopt Black Magic raw as it is an open format and supports 12:1. But Canon will never do that, they are all about proprietary. 
About every one clamoring for an RF mount. I agree that would be nice but are you willing to give up your internal ND filters for it?


----------



## blackcoffee17 (Feb 21, 2020)

Kjsheldo said:


> As I mentioned above, for a full-frame doc cinema camera, you could put a 24-70mm f2.8 lens on it and be good 95% of the time. But you also want lens stabilization. The EF version doesn't have it. The 16-35mm f2.8 doesn't either. Whereas the RF Mount versions do. The Sigma EF does, but that stabilization is pretty awful. And that lens is huge.



Hmmm...what about lenses like the Canon 50-1000, not available in any other system and used quite often in documentaries, like wildlife, nature. 
Or apart from wildlifem it was used in Alex Honnold's documentary which won the Oscar.


----------



## mariosk1gr (Feb 21, 2020)

jvillain said:


> Canon could always adopt Black Magic raw as it is an open format and supports 12:1. But Canon will never do that, they are all about proprietary.
> About every one clamoring for an RF mount. I agree that would be nice but are you willing to give up your internal ND filters for it?


If not now, sometime this/next year they have to introduce a cinema RF body for sure. They are working so hard for excellent quality glass and now with a lot of promising milc camera body... so that's where it goes. I don't think Canon can avoid to make one either. I think that they will a find a way to put at least a variable nd filter... there is some space after all between the sensor and the back element of the lens mount right?


----------



## jeffa4444 (Feb 26, 2020)

cpreston said:


> I think the C300 III will be the 8K S35 camera that shoots 4K. I know some people would assume the 8K model would be the flagship model, but an 8K S35 camera would still be a step down from a full frame 5.9K C500 II. The 8K S35 sensor is just a better way to capture 4K footage than the current 4K sensor. It is analogous to the way the original C300 captured 1080p off of a 4K sensor.


More likely they will save 8K for a MKII version of the C700 rather than the C300 MKIII. Arri will have towards the end of 2020 an 8K Super 35 camera which is a new line-up to the Alexa I suspect the C300 MKIII would more likely be 6K that shoots 4K super 35.


----------



## robotfist (Mar 10, 2020)

I wonder if this will be a C300 MK III that will be targeted at corporate/doc shooters. It will probably shoot on the same 5.9k sensor found on the C500 II, down scaled to 4k, to a middle ground codec with no internal raw. That would effectively put it right in the middle of the C200 and the C500 II. You can either get the C200 with 4k sensor and internal raw, the C300 III with 5.9k sensor and a robust middle ground codec but no raw, or the C500 II with everything in one box.


----------

