# Cinema EOS Development Opinion



## Canon Rumors Guy (Nov 5, 2011)

```
<div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/11/cinema-eos-development-opinion/" href="http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php">Share</a></div><div><script src="http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share" type="text/javascript"></script></div><div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: right; margin-left: 10px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href="http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/11/cinema-eos-development-opinion/"></a></div>
<strong>This is an opinion with a mix of speculation

</strong>A lot has been made of the â€œin developmentâ€ announcement of a new â€œCinemaâ€ branded DSLR. Most people seem to think the camera is going to be based on the 1D X.</p>
<p>I agree with <a href="http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/cameras/Canon_video.html">Keith at Northlight Images</a>, nothing was said by Canon as to what the form factor would be. I think what they showed was just a 1D X body with a red â€œCâ€ stuck on it for marketing purposes.</p>
<p>I think the camera theyâ€™re speaking of will sit between the 5D Mark III and 1D X. Perhaps an EOS 3C? I do not like the name â€œ3Dâ€ for a camera that doesnâ€™t actually shoot 3D.</p>
<p>I also donâ€™t think it would be a full size EOS-1 body. They just spent a few hours touting the small stature of the C300, I donâ€™t think theyâ€™d make a cinema DSLR bigger than it needs to be. Iâ€™d have to hear from cinematographers & videographers whether or not a camera the size of the 5D Mark II is preferred to the EOS-1 body.</p>
<p><strong>What about photographers?

</strong>I know a good majority of photographers are pretty tired about hearing about video in DSLRs. A lot of the community is looking for a new â€œphotography firstâ€ full frame DSLR that doesnâ€™t require remortgaging their homes. I think the 5D Mark III will be that camera. Itâ€™ll probably have video features on par with the 1D X, but will be a high resolution, high image quality still photography camera.</p>
<p>Iâ€™ve said before that I think Canon plans to monetize the videographers and video DSLRs, so something like the â€œEOS 3Câ€ makes a lot of sense. Ã‚ Looking at the prices of the new cinema lenses, it seems videographers have no problem spending more.</p>
<p>So donâ€™t be worried photographers, Canon hasnâ€™t forgotten about you and Iâ€™m sure will deliver the product we all know you want.</p>
<p>Itâ€™s going to be a very interesting 2012 to say the least.</p>
<p><em>This was just an opinion post, please donâ€™t be too hard on me.</em></p>
<p><strong><span style="color: #ff0000;">c</span>r</strong></p>
```


----------



## JR (Nov 5, 2011)

It will be interesting to see which direction Canon is going though. I tend to agree with you Graig that Canon has not forgotten about photography. However with all the new video product out and the 1DX, I wonder if Canon will still position itself as the high MP cameras manufacturer compared to Nikon. I see a lot of focus with low light from the new video based product and I am hoping some of this technology trickle down to our DSLR.

I guess in the mean I will keep adding to my collection of lenses and but the time any new product comes out I will have no choice to buy it!


----------



## Manuel (Nov 5, 2011)

I'm very disappointed about the non-releasing of a 5D mark III. Frustrated by the 8bit C300. Disgusted by the washed out, poorly white balanced and noisy image quality of the last Laforet's video compared to Nocturne and Reverie. And very, very, very Sorry for Scorsese. Ah, last but not least, the surreal price range. If only Canon had really listened properly...What's your take CR? Hope the Canon people are listening because they just released an object to rent not to own: the 5D mark II IQ still beats hands down any competitor.


----------



## Jettatore (Nov 5, 2011)

I can completely understand a Photography only, dedicated FF model at a sweet price point. But THAT should be the addition to the current lineup. I also wouldn't mind paying "slightly" more for the next 5D Mark III (or the new equivalent if they are re-naming things) if that continues to progress and be what it is to so many for so many different reasons. For example, if it needs an extra processor, or to remove that stupid 15 minute recording limit UK tax (although artistically that really doesn't bother me).

What I don't want, is some outrageous price to get all the features of both video and photography that used to sit comfortably in the 5D II price range for a single body solution. I also don't want to have a video camera that lacks updated high end still photography features of the new generation of DSLR, and vice versa I don't want a still camera that doesn't push forward hard on the video features we have all been expecting out of the MKIII.

4K may not be needed, however without it, I think they need to at least include, a safe frame margin to work within, this way if you bump into your tripod or the like, you can fix that little hiccup in editing because you have additional region beyond your 1080p recorded. If you nail the shot you can just scale it down to 1080p keeping the full frame, but if you have some editing required, you now have some breathing room. As well, RAW capture (even if it required an external fast storage solution), extra framerate capture, etc. etc. all the stuff everyone is always saying they want.

And then obviously, the great photography improvements as we are seeing with the 1DX. If I want two bodies, it's because I need two bodies that BOTH do awesome photography and awesome video. You need at least two cameras in almost every video situation, and sometimes it's convenient to carry two cameras or have an assistant/second shooter for still shooting. I'm certainly not going to buy 4 cameras for these needs. Either way, the revolution in DSLR was that they were merging video and photography and that is why I got involved in the first place. It was be a severe mistake by Canon to overlook or mis-understand that.

Otherwise, so long as the new announcements don't compromise what we have all been coming to expect and investing in, I'm actually now after digesting it all, pretty happy about the new announcements as it's options for rental if any budget allows for it and it makes my current equipment compatible with some pretty cool high end stuff. The new Sony EF Red also looks like a great addition for rental. I just don't want, to see any detractions from the natural progression DSLR was heading in before investors and marketing dufasses got involved, and fear that without feedback from the community they might make some mis-understood blunders. Also, anything Canon doesn't do, someone else will, because the current technology makes it all possible and contrary to what I am sure is popular belief, this tech is already mass-marketable, mass-produce-able and it can be pushed a lot farther than the generation models we have without modern day miracles or marketing pretending like we are asking for too much.

Also, side discussion, Hollywood and TV are slowly on their way out as the internet consumes everything. Just another thing for Canon to keep in mind before it scares away what could very well be their long term future.


----------



## Jettatore (Nov 5, 2011)

JR said:


> I wonder if Canon will still position itself as the high MP cameras manufacturer compared to Nikon. I see a lot of focus with low light from the new video based product and I am hoping some of this technology trickle down to our DSLR.



Noiseless images are more important than large resolutions. If we can get a larger resolutions without noise then that's even better. But if you're adding noise, to get to the larger resolution, then you might as well just get the crispest image you can at whatever res that can effectively happen at, and use digital scaling to make it larger when needed probably at the same rate of image degradation.


----------



## bsbeamer (Nov 5, 2011)

> Looking at the prices of the new cinema lenses, it seems videographers have no problem spending more.



Just because Canon is pricing the new lenses at $45-48k for the zooms and $6,800 for EACH of the primes doesn't mean the video community can readily afford these products. At those steep prices, I'd have to have a huge project with an intense need in order to justify that expense. With most of the low and restricted mid range budgets these days, I have a feeling that many will be sticking with their current lens lineup for awhile to come.


----------



## Stu_bert (Nov 5, 2011)

I cannot see Canon producing something with better specs than the C300 or the 1Dx unless they are priced to match that. Now of course the dSLR version is almost certain to not have the "addons" that make the C300 a complete system, and it is interesting to note that when you add these to Scarlett it brings the price closer to a C300 (specs aside).

I can see the "C3" dSLR having better video features that the 1Dx, but not better quality stills. I also concur with the view that there will be something around the $4-5K mark and then a MK III around the $3.5K mark. I would (happily) be stunned if either of these offer 4K video.

I can also see the C300 as more than just a release of some HW - they are cultivating relationships, building out the underlying support infrastructure which the film & TV studios would require. One assumes that Canon have done their research reasonably well, and the C300 fits the bill. Whether that is $16K or $20K, which if you subtract the "extras" might equate to a $8-10K body only. They will be working on the replacement which may well see alpha testing late 2012/early 2013.

Imagine the reaction if Canon released a better spec body, for half the price less than a year after releasing the C300? Ditto releasing a MK III which has better MP, better ISO and better video than the 1Dx...

Ultimately, frustration aside for all the readers here, one assumes Canon looks at their Video / Cinema line and their dSLR line and wants to keep them both. A dSLR which does better than a Panny GH2 for video, better than the MK II for stills and equal to AF to the 7D would be great as it would allow us all to stop carrying around multiple items and do it all in 1 body. Having played with a 7D mainly for the video (& sold it to a friend) then I would love it in a FF body and same / better features than my 1Ds. Just not sure if the 1Dx will fulfill that or whether I will wait for the C3 / MK III. 

Finally, I think that the Canon tech for this generation has now been defined by the C300 / 1Dx. I don't see any "leaps" until 2013, and so my buying decisions will be based around these "limits"....


----------



## Mack (Nov 5, 2011)

Canon has repeatedly said that they have separate teams on photo and video. So as much as the cameras are very similar, that would make it seem like development of the new EOS C cameras is alongside the newer 5D, with a different team working on each. A lot of photographers are afraid that the C line means less focus on still cameras, but that shouldn't be the case if they are indeed separate teams simultaneously working.


----------



## CarebbianTraveler (Nov 5, 2011)

bsbeamer said:


> > Looking at the prices of the new cinema lenses, it seems videographers have no problem spending more.
> 
> 
> 
> Just because Canon is pricing the new lenses at $45-48k for the zooms and $6,800 for EACH of the primes doesn't mean the video community can readily afford these products. At those steep prices, I'd have to have a huge project with an intense need in order to justify that expense. With most of the low and restricted mid range budgets these days, I have a feeling that many will be sticking with their current lens lineup for awhile to come.



I think what canon did sounds logical: When they released the 5Dmk2, they had no clue about how this will hit the videography. But they pretty soon recognized this market and started with firmware updates.
Now canon has merged the two previously separate teams, video and DSLR, together to improve both sides and developed technology that plays in the highest league of videography. That's what they just released. So I guess this will also drastically improve the video quality of mid- and entry level DSLRs in the next time.


----------



## seanmcr6 (Nov 5, 2011)

The 1Dx is a stills camera that can shoot video (like the 5D). It is designed first and foremost to take the best stills possible.

The C camera will be a video camera that can shoot stills. It will be designed first and foremost to take video.

Those are facts you can take to the bank.

As for the 1D body...I cannot recall Canon EVER using a fake mockup for marketing images. Remember the 5D launch? or the 7D. They always used the actual camera and blacked out the bits that might give it away. The C will be a 1D body. I'm sure of it.

Having said that, I do not understand how they are going to put pro video features into a 1D body. XLR, genlock, SDI, Clean HDMI? Like where would you even put those? Since they've stated they were going to put the same Super35 sensor in this body....I don't see how they could also have all those features and not eat away at the C300 marketshare. 

So I believe, they are going to use the same strategy that worked with the 5D. Take the sensor from the very expensive pro unit (C300) and put them in the inexpensive body (in this example, the 1D) and sent it out into the world. No bells, no whistles.

Amateurs and weekend-pros are much more likely to accept a lack of pro features to get the promise of the great output. (proven by the success of the original 5D) They're willing to work around those omissions. The front line pro's don't want them, they need them. They cannot add a new canon camera into their workflow if it doesn't genlock...or provide the HDSDI output they need. Since they HAVE to have these features, they pay for them. 

They will probably price it pretty damn close to the 1Dx though. Think $6-8K.


----------



## bsbeamer (Nov 5, 2011)

CarebbianTraveler said:


> bsbeamer said:
> 
> 
> > > Looking at the prices of the new cinema lenses, it seems videographers have no problem spending more.
> ...



I'm not saying it's not logical, or a great product and development. I'm saying the COST isn't going to get these into the hands of the masses, unless a rental house offers a huge price break on a weekly rental for these lenses. This isn't a "videography" lens release - it's a professional cinema release. The closer competition is Zeiss and the other PL mount lenses.

Until you see a wedding video guy shooting with these lenses on a regular basis, and the internal corporate video guys ordering several of them at a time, the term "videography" really shouldn't be used.


----------



## CarebbianTraveler (Nov 5, 2011)

bsbeamer said:


> I'm not saying it's not logical, or a great product and development. I'm saying the COST isn't going to get these into the hands of the masses, unless a rental house offers a huge price break on a weekly rental for these lenses. This isn't a "videography" lens release - it's a professional cinema release. The closer competition is Zeiss and the other PL mount lenses.
> 
> Until you see a wedding video guy shooting with these lenses on a regular basis, and the internal corporate video guys ordering several of them at a time, the term "videography" really shouldn't be used.



It's definitely not canons idea to make a $45k lens for the masses. But I bet we well see cheaper cinema lenses from canon.
Btw: What is the difference between a normal EF lens and a new CN lens? I've just read the aperture diaphragm is different and the CN lenses seem to have full smooth manual control (as the FD lenses). These are no reasons to announce a new mount. Have they probably fixed the very bad auto focus?

As you've recognized I'm a pure still photographer and I don't know much about videography / cinematography. Interesting for me is that the C300 is also canons first EVIL camera. I thought that they will aim high, but not that high 
But when the autofocus works now, this would flatten the way for a FF EVIL camera and therefore cheap lenses.


----------



## terwilliger (Nov 5, 2011)

It seems really simple to me. I'd like to go full-frame, but I'm simply not going to spend $2,300 on a 3 year old body -- especially when the product in question seems to be on a 3 year release cycle. Canon will not get my money until they release a new product. I'm sure there are many other people in my boat as well.

BTW: The 5D / other DSLRs may be great for cinematography but they're basically useless for many common consumer video tasks like shooting kids -- you have to have AF when you're chasing the crazy boogers running around unpredictably. For that, my 7D sits quietly on the shelf and I use a consumer grade Canon video camera. If the 5DmkIII had ZERO video I wouldn't shed a tear.


----------



## cm71td (Nov 5, 2011)

> I think what they showed was just a 1D X body with a red â€œCâ€ stuck on it for marketing purposes.



Bummer! That extra grip on the bottom of my video camera would come in really handy for my new film shot in portrait mode.


----------



## CarebbianTraveler (Nov 5, 2011)

dilbert said:


> There is no autofocus capability with the CN lenses.
> 
> It's quite possible that the CN lenses actually have a bigger aperture than any of the stills lenses. For example, the 50mm and 85mm are both "T1.3". The 85/1.2L is "T1.4". So it would seem safe to assume that the 85/T1.3 is a different design. The same holds true for the 50mm/1.2L (it has a T-stop of 1.4.)
> 
> ...



Thanks, this would explain why the cinema lenses are so much more expensive than the still ones, especially the zoom ones. The mechanics to prevent the focus breathing have to be much more complicated.

So canon will probably never build any low-budget cinema lenses.


----------



## bsbeamer (Nov 5, 2011)

dilbert said:


> If you've done your homework and planned out the shoot for your project properly, then you will know on which days you need which lenses and you will rent lenses accordingly, rather than buy.



I guess you've never been on location with clients who have last minute changes to everything? Or a director who wants to get a few other "angles" in addition to the 50mm shot? That concept works well in theory, but not in practice, unless you're renting an entire set of lenses for an entire shoot - and even then, I've had additional days tacked onto the end of a shoot because the client wanted to get some extra b-roll or scheduled another interview, or something... Unfortunately mid-range clients these days want it all. Unless you can serve it up with a smile, then they'll find someone else to do it for cheaper.


----------



## bsbeamer (Nov 5, 2011)

For those that don't know, T-stop is another method of measuring the aperture while compensating for light loss. It is commonly used on cinema lenses. 
This thread explains it all quite well: http://www.scarletuser.com/showthread.php?t=882

One main benefit of these cinema style lenses is a smooth aperture adjustment and smooth focus adjustment. They typically don't have hard "stops" and can (usually) easily go to a 1/3 or 1/2 stop increments between the markings which makes them able to "pull" focus or aperture during a shot. Among other things, the new Canon cinema prime lenses appear to be much "faster" than the current Zeiss CP series. They seem to be more on par with the RED series of primes, but until they're put into use and tested on the same camera in the same conditions, it will be hard to figure out the real difference.

Old used PL mount lenses still fetch a huge price tag on the used market, so anything more modern will absolutely hold its value for years to come. Wouldn't expect to see any "cheap" Zeiss CP's or Cooke's out there anytime soon, unless either of them come up with a budget line to compete with Canon, RED, and themselves.


----------



## pedro (Nov 5, 2011)

CRguy wrote: 

"What about photographers?

*I know a good majority of photographers are pretty tired about hearing about video in DSLRs. A lot of the community is looking for a new â€œphotography firstâ€ full frame DSLR that doesnâ€™t require remortgaging their homes. I think the 5D Mark III will be that camera. Itâ€™ll probably have video features on par with the 1D X, but will be a high resolution, high image quality still photography camera*

Iâ€™ve said before that I think Canon plans to monetize the videographers and video DSLRs, so something like the â€œEOS 3Câ€ makes a lot of sense. Ã‚ Looking at the prices of the new cinema lenses, it seems videographers have no problem spending more.

*So donâ€™t be worried photographers, Canon hasnâ€™t forgotten about you and Iâ€™m sure will deliver the product we all know you want.*"

Well, that is just what I wanted to hear after all that video whirlwind from Hollywood. 
Looking forward to it. Don't care if the 5Diii won't materialize in 2012. 
I rather have a happy 2013 with an upgraded still photography body 8)

Que la pases vakÃ¡n en Mexico, varÃ³n.


----------



## gene_can_sing (Nov 5, 2011)

Hearing all the photogs complain about the upcoming DSLR / Video hybrid and not having a true, photo only 5D3; I can't help but think of the irony.

I'm pretty certain the Video DSLR is going to be a lower megapixel stills camera (probably around 12mp since that the ideal for good 4K). The sensors in the video DSLR will probably be the same as the upcoming 5D3 which will be huge megapixel (36 mp to match Nikon).

But a 12mp is going to take much better photos because lower megapixles translates to better ISO / noise performance, especially verses a camera with 3 times the megapixels.

So the DSLR hybrid camera will probably be a better stills camera than the upcoming 5D3 for photogs. But yes, probably not ideal for poster sized prints. But how often do you really make those anyways?

So with the DSLR video hybrid, you will get a better photo camera and a better video camera, just not huge megapixel.


----------



## pedro (Nov 6, 2011)

@gene_can_sing:
Having read several of your posts in the past, there is something about it. 
Let us just hope that canon will aim to beat nikon by IQ instead of MP. 
given the new sensor technique introduced by the 1Dx and the trend set at lower MP's 
lets hope for a 5Diii at 24 MP then. 
I'd be very happy if they were following their new outline MP wise...
I am an absolute non tech, but I dare to say, 
with the 1Dx in mind they will even get improved IQ 
at 24 to 28 MP. 
Or is that too much of wishful thinking?


----------



## JR (Nov 6, 2011)

Well, I really do hope the hybrid camera coming up will give us all this. One thing for sure from a marketing perspective, the video aspect is giving Canon an excuse to go to a lower MP camera architecture and not loose face. Remember they have made a point for a long time that MP is important, so you cant all of a sudden change your mind (well you can but for a corporation you need to play with this image carefully).

I think for Canon branding the next few move are critical but are likely very well planned, and it is likely not without reason that we have yet to ear about the 5D II replacement. They are just not there yet in there chess game. My two cents...


----------



## AG (Nov 6, 2011)

bsbeamer said:


> > Looking at the prices of the new cinema lenses, it seems videographers have no problem spending more.
> 
> 
> 
> Just because Canon is pricing the new lenses at $45-48k for the zooms and $6,800 for EACH of the primes doesn't mean the video community can readily afford these products. At those steep prices, I'd have to have a huge project with an intense need in order to justify that expense. With most of the low and restricted mid range budgets these days, I have a feeling that many will be sticking with their current lens lineup for awhile to come.



Firstly unless you are working in a film production house or television studio, the zoom lenses are not marketed at yourself.

And the Primes with their MSRT of $6800 is not that bad, especially when you take into consideration that this is not street price.
How many amateur photographers do you see walking around with a Sigma 200-500? (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/551435-REG/Sigma_597101_200_500mm_f_2_8_EX_DG.html)
Ok i understand that its a $25,000 lens but its also not something that the average Joe will want for his kit.

The same goes for these lenses, they are aimed at the semi pro/advanced amateur videographer, that is using EOS equipment and wants to take it a step beyond a basic Canon 50mm f1.2 for filming (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/457680-GREY/Canon_1257B002AA_Normal_EF_50mm_f_1_2L.html) which is $1500 by itself and not really designed for video.


----------



## Cannon Man (Nov 6, 2011)

I love all the news we have had over the past week and i cant wait till the 1DX comes available! BUT im a little fustrated if canon doesnt make a studio orientated 1D.

I thought Canon was all about high quality cameras for taking PICTURES. And with the announcement of the C300 that is almost 20 000$ and lenses that are up to 47 000$

Compared to the quality that comes with that high price my 1D IV is starting to feel like cheap toy.

I want to know that im using the best available gear from Canon.
Now Canon has shown with this announcement that they can make a 6800$ 85mm prime lens, i feel like my 85mm 1.2L II USM is not even close to as good as it could be.

When will i be able to buy a 20 000$ 1D camera with 7000$ prime lenses with AF??


----------



## Jettatore (Nov 6, 2011)

Pedro wrote:
'"'Looking forward to it. Don't care if the 5Diii won't materialize in 2012. ""

Yeah same here. I don't mind at all if the 5D III or renamed equivalent that I have been waiting for doesn't come out until late '12 or early/mid '13, I'm ready to buy it whenever it launches.


----------



## traveller (Nov 6, 2011)

Jettatore said:


> Pedro wrote:
> '"'Looking forward to it. Don't care if the 5Diii won't materialize in 2012. ""
> 
> Yeah same here. I don't mind at all if the 5D III or renamed equivalent that I have been waiting for doesn't come out until late '12 or early/mid '13, I'm ready to buy it whenever it launches.



I disagree, 2012 looks like it will be an important year for the industry and Canon need to address weaknesses in its line-up, or risk losing further market share to Nikon and Sony. The 1D X and this 'Cinema EOS' stuff is fine for the professionals, but now Canon needs to look at the enthusiast and mirrorless market. 

If the rumoured D800 really was delayed by the floods in Thailand, then Canon will need a strong 5D MkII repacement in 2012 _not 2013_, which addresses its predecessor's weaknesses without pricing itself out of the market (e.g. by trying to be a 1Ds series replacement). 

They also need to do something about mirrorless trend and it needs to be as strong and decisive as launching 'Cinema EOS'. If they fail to provide this next year it will be Nikon and Sony's gain; people have waited to see Canon's hand, but they won't wait forever.


----------



## bsbeamer (Nov 6, 2011)

dilbert said:


> The problems you face here have got nothing to do with the price of Canon's lenses and everything to do with the way you run your business and market it to customers as there's nothing stopping you from shooting cheap like others do except yourself.



Shooting "cheap" is something that I'd recommend anyone with an ounce of professionalism to avoid doing. Shooting *within budget* however, is what I'd recommend everyone to always do. "Cheap" has so many meanings to it, many which have a negative connotation to them...

This can bring up the philosophical difference of what separates a professional from some guy running around with a Flip camera, or the corporate PR guy who records a speaker at a podium with his iPhone... Not saying you can't make something worthwhile with cameras like that, but there are much better tools available these days for someone who does this kinda thing more often and makes a living out of it.

These $45-48k lenses and $6800 primes aren't geared to someone on mid-range projects like mine. I know that, Canon knows that. I will continue to use the same gear that I currently utilize to get the job done. I've been satisfied with it and they get the job done. Until those tools stop performing to my expectations (and client expectations) I'll probably continue to do so.


----------



## bsbeamer (Nov 6, 2011)

AG said:


> Firstly unless you are working in a film production house or television studio, the zoom lenses are not marketed at yourself.
> 
> And the Primes with their MSRT of $6800 is not that bad, especially when you take into consideration that this is not street price.
> How many amateur photographers do you see walking around with a Sigma 200-500? (http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/551435-REG/Sigma_597101_200_500mm_f_2_8_EX_DG.html)
> ...



I agree completely with the zooms. If you are going to be using these lenses close to DAILY then there are lots of reasons to invest in them. If you have a larger scale project with a budget that can support it, there's another reason. But for the majority of folks out there, these zooms aren't going to be purchased for use on a regular basis anytime soon.

As for the primes, I think they are competitively priced within the market. Street price on them will probably bring them relatively close in price to the RED prime series, and at least on paper the Canon's seem to outperform them. The available focal lengths for the "complete series" aren't enough to abandon an existing kit, but these lenses will probably be really popular to people shooting on many different cameras. It would be really interesting to see if Canon adds any additional focal lengths in the next year, or if they offer discounted kit prices like RED and Zeiss do.


----------



## Jettatore (Nov 6, 2011)

IRT traveller:

Mirrorless really doesn't change the end result of digital photography at this point in time. It doesn't really even change that much, the way in which the user operates the device. It merely allows the lenses to be mounted closer to the sensor which has some technical differences and in order to leverage it for smaller equipment requires all new, smaller, re-designed lenses, yet, there already are product lines for this, that's Panasonic and others.

At the end of the day, especially if you are a competent editor, digital photography is sort of settled. We'll continue to get faster speeds, better ISO/less noise to a point, etc. There's also medium and large format considerations, which have great IQ and usually have slower lenses due to the nature of physics. And other than High ISO at low noise which is starting to show up rapidly, and the ability to print HUGE while in high detail which medium and large format already covers, -this game is figured out. The people left who can't create amazing images just aren't good artists, don't grasp digital editing (which is the equivalent of the darkroom developing process and is highly important) and they just need more practice. 

The innovations to come, will mostly be in lower prices and converging technologies (like video and photo being done affordable in one unit, which we are already in the middle of). The rest of this non-sense is about money, and we all see how well that is going for the world.

Humans continue to do things in outdated weird ways. I mean, we go down to the camera shop to look at what's on the shelf and if something sucks and no one buys it, it eventually ends up in some garbage pile next to a rain forest along side all of our recently obsoleted garbage (and doesn't make for the nicest nature photography...) Would make more sense to be making the equipment on demand with on-sight recycling for botched and obsolete designs. Would be fun if the Camera manufacturing plants were eventually turned into a "public works resource" where people of all ages and skill levels could go to learn and create their own cameras and whatnot (same for all other fields, music equipment, computers, etc.). The market/money and marketing are creating a lot of needless waste and they are slowing down the progression of technology.

Of interesting note to the above, a digital camera sensor is basically the same thing as a solar cell (which we obviously all need to start getting involved in), an array of PIN photodiodes. When light hits these diodes that make up the sensor, electrons are collected. Now in digital photography, these values are counted/organized and stored on disk and then read back later on a monitor etc., as your pixel values that you would see in photoshop. In solar energy mediums, these same electrons would be stored for their energy in something like a battery, or converted into some other form of energy, like water heat. The point being, if the people take over the development of Photography and Solar, we'll all be a bit smarter, we won't kill ourselves and the planet, and we will all have the nicest cameras... Now how's that for some innovative vision and IQ, or do you still just want a mirrorless camera body?

Here's a link to learning electrical engineering at home, from the beginning, it's like a 40+ hour, free, educational series some school posted on youtube, and it's awesome. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZEZUysFPDY&feature=relmfu


----------



## traveller (Nov 7, 2011)

IRT Jettatore: 

No I don't believe that mirrorless is currently a game changer, but with convergent technologies such as on chip phase detect AF and high resolution EVFs, it is probably the direction that camera technology is going. Once you don't need a mirror to provide an OVF and PDAF, why compromise your lens designs (particularly wide angle) to accomodate it? Canon needs a foothold in this market, or they'll end up in the position that Leica found themselves. There is also the problem of what's going to happen to their compact camera business with the next couple of generations of mobile 'phones. 

People have been stating that digital cameras have reached a plateau for years; in the case of APS-C, I think they're correct. Full frame can probably get to 30-40MP with a trade-off of increased (or perhaps I should say, not decreased) higher ISO noise, before it starts geting into trouble with diffraction. If 21MP is good enough for you then great, stick with a 5D MkII (hope you're also fine with the two generation old AF and metering system), but I wouldn't make assumptions about other people's current or future output needs. 

Thanks for the lecture on wasteful consumer technology, this could easily be applied to 95% of the cr*p that we spend our hard earned money on. If you're no longer interested in updating you gear because it meets all your needs and desires then that's great, just don't bleat about it on a camera rumours website.


----------



## terryh2c (Nov 7, 2011)

terwilliger said:


> It seems really simple to me. I'd like to go full-frame, but I'm simply not going to spend $2,300 on a 3 year old body -- especially when the product in question seems to be on a 3 year release cycle. Canon will not get my money until they release a new product. I'm sure there are many other people in my boat as well.
> 
> Agree. Why spend $2500 on a product at the very end of its product cycle?
> And the update has been excruciatingly slow in being released, with endless focus (!) on video video video.
> Companies like Canon amaze me - there are ten of thousands of people who bought their product before video was even a thought on a product feature list and yet they seem far more interested in developing new markets than providing their existing customers with product updates.


----------



## AprilForever (Nov 7, 2011)

Canon Rumors said:


> <div id=\"fb_share_1\" style=\"float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;\"><a name=\"fb_share\" type=\"box_count\" share_url=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/11/cinema-eos-development-opinion/\" href=\"http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php\">Share</a></div><div><script src=\"http://static.ak.fbcdn.net/connect.php/js/FB.Share\" type=\"text/javascript\"></script></div><div class=\"tweetmeme_button\" style=\"float: right; margin-left: 10px;\"><a class=\"tm_button\" rel=\"&style=normal&b=2\" href=\"http://www.canonrumors.com/2011/11/cinema-eos-development-opinion/\"></a></div>
> <strong>This is an opinion with a mix of speculation
> 
> </strong>A lot has been made of the â€œin developmentâ€ announcement of a new â€œCinemaâ€ branded DSLR. Most people seem to think the camera is going to be based on the 1D X.</p>
> ...



I indeed am tired of hearing about video in my slr. If the 7D mk II had no video, it would not be even slightly bothered. Do I use my 7D video? Occassionaly, but if the lack of video kept price down, I would be happy. Or, if they just left the video the same, and focused on improving the still picture side of things, that would indeed make me much happier. 

I'm a photographer, not a videographer!


----------



## moreorless (Nov 7, 2011)

traveller said:


> Once you don't need a mirror to provide an OVF and PDAF, why compromise your lens designs (particularly wide angle) to accomodate it?



I'v often heard this but really where has mirrorless shown advantages in cost, performance or size so far? The NEX lenses really don't seem to offer any of them over a relgular crop sensor. Nothing I'v seen so far really hints to me that a mirrorless system that offered the same functionality(IQ, lens linup, controls etc) as current DSLR systems would be a signifcant advanatge.

My guess would be that the mirrorless market will end up running alongside DSLR's, smaller sensor bodies offering DSLR functionality but lesser IQ and AF as they do now and larger sensor ones focusing on pancake primes that offer a much smaller system.

I'd guess Canon's seeming lack of action could well be down to putting extra devolpment time into a system to get it right aswell. Nikon and Pentax's systems just seem like rushed jobs to me and I don't see either of them having much sucess, to do that I think Canon either needs to come up with a large sensor mirrorless with a good range of small primes at launch or a smaller sensor one thats much cheaper than Nikon's effort.


----------



## Jettatore (Nov 7, 2011)

irt: April, If anything, the quite large customer base video extras bring to the table helps them sell many more of the same units and also moves more lenses out the door which should help more than anything in keeping the cost of all this gear down for all of us involved. And if it doesn't, the problem wasn't the video inclusions...


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Nov 8, 2011)

AprilForever said:


> I indeed am tired of hearing about video in my slr. If the 7D mk II had no video, it would not be even slightly bothered. Do I use my 7D video? Occassionaly, but if the lack of video kept price down, I would be happy. Or, if they just left the video the same, and focused on improving the still picture side of things, that would indeed make me much happier.
> 
> I'm a photographer, not a videographer!


This is a fairly common argument. The most common valid evidence for excluding video that I've seen is that camera makers are dedicating buttons (at most one or two) to video (somebody recently called it a "Youtube button") instead of to features they use. Now, some cameras won't let you remap buttons using custom functions, and I don't know if any really will let you remap buttons that are dedicated to video currently. Out of the whole camera's interface, it would be a valid complaint (in the case of the "Youtube button" guy's camera, I think it was a dedicated ISO button in a specific advantageous location that was claimed to be lost, or something like that - don't recall which camera however). It's definitely a valid concern.

However, and just to repeat it again, Canon gets a heck of a lot of value out of having video, and so do many casual users. Nobody has ever demonstrated that it adds substantial cost to cameras - can you point to a price spike in cameras (not better explained by adjustments for inflation etc.)? I don't believe so. There really isn't any reason to believe that Canon needs to make the camera more expensive, despite having poured interesting new developments and research into making their movie modes more viable - Canon gets a significant marketing boost (i.e. the camera is more competitive; it would be a mistake to think that there would be no dent in Canon's market share if they had ignored video, and that's before considering they would have missed out on possibilities like Cinema EOS to enter or create new markets) and they benefit from users who use their DSLRs as video production cameras, although recently they indeed have been apparently working to please purists - video users first, with the new and ambitious 1D X spec, and also with the Cinema EOS line. I wouldn't look for them to delete the Live View button any time soon, and the dedication of the shutter button to taking still pictures in video modes on EOS DSLRs should likely persist, so a video on/off button may continue to persist on all their DSLRs. In the end, though, I'm not sure it's a big deal.


----------



## RichST (Nov 8, 2011)

gene_can_sing said:


> Hearing all the photogs complain about the upcoming DSLR / Video hybrid and not having a true, photo only 5D3; I can't help but think of the irony.
> 
> I'm pretty certain the Video DSLR is going to be a lower megapixel stills camera
> 
> So with the DSLR video hybrid, you will get a better photo camera and a better video camera, just not huge megapixel.



Yes, but it's pretty apparent by looking at the spec sheets and reading between the lines with what canon has been saying and it looks like it will be a modified 1DX sensor, the 4K video will be done in an 80% crop mode with corresponds with an APS-H sensor size. The 1Dx is the natural to use for the sensor since it already has enough speed built-in to the converters, all the wiring and data pipelines etc to handle the very fast data feed that would be coming off the sensor at 4k in video mode.


----------

