# CANON U.S.A. INTRODUCES EOS-1D C DIGITAL SLR CAMERA FEATURING 4K HIGH-RESOLUTION VIDEO CAPTURE



## Canon Rumors Guy (Apr 12, 2012)

```
<div name="googleone_share_1" style="position:relative;z-index:5;float: right; /*margin: 70px 0 0 0;*/ top:70px; right:120px; width:0;"><g:plusone size="tall" count="1" href=""></g:plusone></div><div id="fb_share_1" style="float: right; margin: 0 0px 0 10px;"><a name="fb_share" type="box_count" share_url="" 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; margin-bottom: 70px;"><a class="tm_button" rel="&style=normal&b=2" href=""></a></div>
<p><strong>CANON U.S.A. INTRODUCES EOS-1D C DIGITAL SLR CAMERA FEATURING 4K HIGH-RESOLUTION VIDEO CAPTURE</strong>

Newest Addition to the Canon Cinema EOS Product Line Combines the Convenient Form Factor of a Digital SLR Camera with Full HD and 4K Video Recording up to 4096 x 2160-Pixel Resolution</p>
<p><strong>LAKE SUCCESS, N.Y., April 12, 2012 –</strong> Continually advancing the frontiers of digital high-resolution motion-image capture for film, television, and other industries, Canon U.S.A., Inc., a leader in digital imaging solutions, today announced the EOS-1D C digital single-lens reflex (SLR) camera.* Delivering outstanding video performance, the compact, lightweight EOS-1D C provides video recording at 4K (4096 x 2160-pixel) or Full HD (1920 x 1080-pixel) resolution to support high-end motion picture, television production and other advanced imaging applications.</p>
<p>Equipped with an 18.1-megapixel full-frame 24mm x 36mm Canon CMOS sensor, the camera records 8-bit 4:2:2 Motion JPEG 4K video to the camera’s CF memory card at 24 frames-per-second (fps) or Full HD 1920 x 1080 video at selectable frame rates from 24p to 60p, making it possible for next-generation visual expression with even higher image-quality and resolution performance.</p>
<p>“The Canon EOS-1D C digital SLR camera was designed in response to the needs of filmmakers, television producers, and other high-level motion-imaging professionals,” stated Yuichi Ishizuka, executive vice president and general manager, Imaging Technologies & Communications Group, Canon U.S.A. “Not only does it combine 4K and Full HD video capture with a convenient design, its use of dual CF cards also offers an efficient workflow compatible with today’s post-production requirements.”</p>
<p><!--more--><strong>Creative Control

</strong>The Canon EOS-1D C digital SLR camera incorporates Canon Log Gamma to enable the recording of high-quality video with rich gradation expression, making possible the type of impressive image quality required in motion pictures by maximizing both highlight and shadow detail retention while also providing a high level of color-grading freedom. The EOS-1D C’s full-frame 24 x 36mm 18.1-megapixel Canon CMOS sensor makes possible a wide range of creative imaging expression, such as image-blur effects. Additional features include an expanded sensitivity range of up to ISO 25600 for exceptional motion-imaging results with reduced noise even in low-light settings. The camera’s ability to record 8-bit 4:2:2 4K and 8-bit 4:2:0 Full HD video to CF cards eliminates the need for an external recorder and enables workflows with increased mobility. If desired, however, captured video (excluding 4K video) can be output from the camera’s HDMI terminal to an external recorder using an uncompressed YCbCr 8-bit 4:2:2 signal.</p>
<p>4K video is captured by an approximately APS-H-sized portion of the full image sensor, while Full HD video can be captured in the user’s choice of two different imaging formats:</p>
<p>The standard Full HD setting captures the full 36mm width of the CMOS sensor to achieve the largest possible angle of view for any compatible lens.</p>
<p>An optional Super 35 crop setting enables cinematographers to match the industry-standard imaging format and angle of view achieved by traditional motion picture cameras. This enables video footage from the EOS-1D C camera to more closely match the look of footage from other cameras in multi-camera shooting environments.</p>
<p>Other useful video-related features on the EOS-1D C DSLR include a built-in headphone jack for real-time audio monitoring, and the ability to view the camera’s LCD even when the HDMI port is connected to an external monitor. The EOS-1D C camera uses the same LP-E4N battery pack as the EOS-1D X, and it can also be powered by an optional AC Adapter Kit.</p>
<p>The EOS-1D C camera ships with Canon software applications including EOS Utility, which enables various camera settings to be adjusted from a PC, and Picture Style Editor. These two personal computer applications enable users to view the camera’s live output on an external monitor1 and adjust the image in real-time to maximize shooting and post-production efficiencies. The software also ensures no loss of quality for 4K/Motion JPEG and full HD/60p video displayed on the external monitor, and it enables video shot with Canon Log Gamma to be output on the monitor with video gamma applied.</p>
<p><strong>Versatility and Value

</strong>The Canon EOS-1D C camera can be used to capture still images with more than 60 interchangeable Canon EF and EF Cinema Lenses, all of which are designed to deliver exceptional image quality to maximize the potential for creative visual expression. The compact size and lightweight design of the camera make it easy to carry so it is highly mobile for convenient shooting inside automobiles and other confined spaces. Its compact size also enables peripheral equipment such as rails and cranes to be more compact, which can facilitate smoother handling and reduced costs on-set. The camera’s low-light capabilities can also help to minimize lighting costs and increase versatility for lighting. For added usability, record start/stop can be remotely controlled by EOS Utility Software via an optional Canon WFT-E6A Wireless File Transmitter.</p>
<p>Realizing the same exceptional still-image performance as the recently introduced Canon EOS-1D X digital SLR camera, the camera provides a sensitivity range of ISO 100-51200 for outstanding still-image results with reduced noise, even in dimly lit settings. Incorporating high-performance Canon Dual DIGIC 5+ image processors, the EOS-1D C delivers high-precision AF and AE performance while also enabling high-speed continuous shooting of up to approximately 12 fps. In the ultra-fast continuous shooting mode, the EOS-1D C provides a continuous shooting speed of up to approximately 14 fps (mirror remains raised during shooting; JPEG images only).</p>
<p>The Canon EOS-1D C digital SLR camera is scheduled to be available within 2012 at a suggested retail price of $15,000.</p>
<p><strong>

</strong></p>
```


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 12, 2012)

*18 MP sensor - same as the 1D X.*

Basically, seems to be a 1D X with minor changes - headphone port instead of flash sync connector, supposedly better heat management, and obviously different firmware. Oh, and that red "*C*" on the front.


----------



## Shnookums (Apr 12, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> *18 MP sensor - same as the 1D X.*
> 
> Basically, seems to be a 1D X with minor changes - headphone port instead of flash sync connector, supposedly better heat management, and obviously different firmware. Oh, and that red "*C*" on the front.



Yes... I'm into video.. Mostly because the 1DII didn't have video of any kind... Should be released in October... Riiiiight.


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 12, 2012)

Well I'll be the first to say, I was completely wrong about this thing. Is Canon ever going to make a camera in the $5k-$7k range? It's a huge market! I don't understand why they left all the high-end still features on board, I mean there are so many awesome cameras out there, hell you could get 2 FS700's for this, WTF Canon?

I predicted that they would take a 1DX body, pull out all the still stuff, and add the 4K sensor. Instead they took a 1DX, left all the photo features, and added 4K and new video features. But still $15k for a DSLR BODY!?


----------



## transpo1 (Apr 12, 2012)

The anger of the Canon video team obviously overpowered the Cinema EOS team...the rivers are running red with blood


----------



## Chad (Apr 12, 2012)

So 1080p is 4:2:0? 4k 4:2:2.... But no option other than 24fps? Comes in around the same price as the c300. To me it seems like they're missing the target somehow. 

I've got about $8k burning a hole in my pocket and all I want is something like the little sister to the c300. Don't need 4k. Just a somewhat affordable, interchangeable lens, large sensor video camera that doesn't look like a giant brick like the Sony FS700!

Still hoping there's a C100 to be announced.


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 12, 2012)

Chad said:


> So 1080p is 4:2:0? 4k 4:2:2.... But no option other than 24fps? Comes in around the same price as the c300. To me it seems like they're missing the target somehow.
> 
> I've got about $8k burning a hole in my pocket and all I want is something like the little sister to the c300. Don't need 4k. Just a somewhat affordable, interchangeable lens, large sensor video camera that doesn't look like a giant brick like the Sony FS700!
> 
> Still hoping there's a C100 to be announced.



I mean there has to be at some point, this is ridiculous. It seems impossible that Canon just doesn't realize that so many people want a $5k-$10k video DSLR, there has to be SOMETHING in the works. I know so many people holding out for something in that range, and here we get stuck with another $15k body, wtf.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 12, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> It seems impossible that Canon just doesn't realize that so many people want a $5k-$10k video DSLR...



It's called the 1D X.


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 12, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> It's called the 1D X.



I'm talking about a camera specifically released and marketed as a video camera. I can't imagine the 1DX being significantly better for video than the 5DIII, I want a bigger improvement than that without having to pay for 12fps, AF and all that other crap.


----------



## samueljay (Apr 12, 2012)

Price is a bit dubious and way too close for the C300, not what I was expecting, and I can't get my head around the 1D C, it looks so weird! Glad I didn't hold out, and got my 5D III 

Edit: Sorry from behind it looks just like a 1D, the photo on the front page made it look like the back of it was extremely odd, but that's the rear of the C500.


----------



## Ivar (Apr 12, 2012)

Now if Canon only announced a high MP 1DxS studio camera the lineup would be complete again, from photo to video ..


----------



## gene_can_sing (Apr 12, 2012)

$15,000 for a 1D-C?

This was the straw that broke the camel's back. I had about $8K to spend, but this is way too much. I guess I have to go the Sony FS-100 route, since the 5D3 was so disappointing for video res.

I can't believe Canon let us down yet again for video. This is too much to handle.

Canon does NOT listen to their customers, and the video people who want a camera between $4K to $8K are left hanging AGAIN!


----------



## gene_can_sing (Apr 12, 2012)

and NO FLIP SCREEN? WTF? That's close to the number 1 request from video people!

The whole point of a DSLR is freedom from using an external monitor when you don't have to, and that's why a flip screen is priceless.

Start listening Canon. It will sell you a lot more cameras. As for me, I'm being forced now into the Sony camp where the prices are much more reasonable and they are a company that listens. Thank God for the Metabones adaptor so I can use all my EOS lenses.


----------



## Stephen Melvin (Apr 12, 2012)

Wow. I came here expecting people to be excited. Instead, everybody seems to hate it. Just what did you guys expect in terms of pricing for a 4k camera? Is there a cheaper 4k camera on the market with a large sensor? 

This is aimed at the pro market. Those who can't afford it probably don't need more than what the Mk III offers. They want more, but really, they don't need more.


----------



## Chewy734 (Apr 12, 2012)

gene_can_sing said:


> and NO FLIP SCREEN? WTF? That's close to the number 1 request from video people!
> 
> The whole point of a DSLR is freedom from using an external monitor when you don't have to, and that's why a flip screen is priceless.
> 
> Start listening Canon. It will sell you a lot more cameras. As for me, I'm being forced now into the Sony camp where the prices are much more reasonable and they are a company that listens. Thank God for the Metabones adaptor so I can use all my EOS lenses.



That feature is barely in the top 10 of features people wanted to see, according to the EOSHD poll.


----------



## JR (Apr 12, 2012)

So i guess this new 1dc will have the same 61 point af system ? Really feels like a recycle of the 1dx for a different market segment.


----------



## JR (Apr 12, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> *18 MP sensor - same as the 1D X.*
> 
> Basically, seems to be a 1D X with minor changes - headphone port instead of flash sync connector, supposedly better heat management, and obviously different firmware. Oh, and that red "*C*" on the front.



And you pay double the price for this little red C!

???


----------



## JustinTArthur (Apr 12, 2012)

I'd buy one if I could afford it. It's priced close to the Red Scarlet-X's Canon mount package and the high-ISO performance is bound to be best-in-class.


----------



## Astro (Apr 12, 2012)

so the rumors about more MP are just wrong.


----------



## Shawn_Lights (Apr 12, 2012)

The price may change just like the C300 did. The C300 was listed at $20,000.

Honestly this camera is attacking the Red Scarlet and I think it's awesome and priced right. However, that $5k - $8k range is important. Canon needs to put something there. Hell, change the price of this 4K DSLR to $8k and people will be amazed.

If I had the money, I'll get this camera. It's what I want, just priced out of my range. I'll rent it for when I shoot a feature for sure.

It may come down in price by the time it's available. Currently it's too close to the C300 and I'm sure they'll want to set them apart by at least $3k.


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Apr 12, 2012)

Stephen Melvin said:


> This is aimed at the pro market. Those who can't afford it probably don't need more than what the Mk III offers. They want more, but really, they don't need more.



Well, "wants" spends more money than "needs" and people are unhappy not because this cam is so expensive but because Canon seems to have neglected the low end market so far including crippling the 5D3 in the video department.


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Apr 12, 2012)

JR said:


> And you pay double the price for this little red C!
> 
> ???



What will truly be epic is if the Magic Lantern team manages to unlock some of those C features on the X.
In all fairness, it seems that Canon is pulling an old trick from the Nvidia playbook by releasing two products with very similar hardware but with a huge price gap since one of the intended markets can support it.


----------



## dswatson83 (Apr 12, 2012)

I think Canon forgot about the competition in this market. RED, Sony, and Panasonic have cameras for less are about equal if not better (except the Panasonic) and will be released sooner. How many thousands of dollars could they have saved if they pulled the 61point af, complex metering system, and some other photo features. I could buy a 5D mark III & a Sony FS700 or a RED system for $15,000


----------



## dkingentertainment (Apr 12, 2012)

So long canon I'm selling my 5d mark II and moving on to the Sony Nex fs700 for around 8,000.00 and many are doing the same! Canon is putting out what they want and not what people are demanding. They are not even trying to address the competition. This lets me know that they are all about a dollar and so am I! So, I'm spending my money elsewhere. Sorry Team Canon but we have other options now. Keep your DSLR for 15,000 body. More than the Scarlet, you can't be serious.


----------



## preppyak (Apr 12, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> I don't understand why they left all the high-end still features on board, I mean there are so many awesome cameras out there, hell you could get 2 FS700's for this, WTF Canon?


You do know none of those FS-700's will do 4k though. Gonna cost you more for that firmware upgrade and output box. Oh, and you start at ISO 500, not 100.


dkingentertainment said:


> More than the Scarlet, you can't be serious.


Actually, by the time you get a Scarlett you can film with, its about the same price. And the Canon will shoot to a convenient format (CF cards), rather than a proprietary RED hard drive that costs 10x as much.

http://www.red.com/store/scarlet/product/scarlet-x-al-canon-mount-package


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 12, 2012)

$10,000 was my limit for this thing, I mean how many cameras do they need at the $15k mark? There are going to be numerous 4K offerings at NAB and I guarantee you some of them will be 1/2 the price of this thing. I really thought they were going with the DSLR form factor to make a camera that was 4K but still affordable.


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 12, 2012)

dswatson83 said:


> I think Canon forgot about the competition in this market. RED, Sony, and Panasonic have cameras for less are about equal if not better (except the Panasonic) and will be released sooner. How many thousands of dollars could they have saved if they pulled the 61point af, complex metering system, and some other photo features. I could buy a 5D mark III & a Sony FS700 or a RED system for $15,000



That's what I've been screaming, I think leaving all the still features of the 1DX on this camera was a mistake, it's a cinema camera after all, do you really need 12fps? It's like a Super 1DX with added features, it seems if they had made it a dedicated video camera they could have easily kept the price under $10k.


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 12, 2012)

preppyak said:


> You do know none of those FS-700's will do 4k though. Gonna cost you more for that firmware upgrade and output box. Oh, and you start at ISO 500, not 100.



I didn't say anything about ISO, dont know where that came from, I guess you're suggesting it's a disadvantage, but the FS700 has built-in ND's so it's not that big of an issue. And I know the FS700 won't do 4k out of the box, but it's still capable of it.


----------



## CanineCandidsByL (Apr 12, 2012)

Just to say something nice, it looks weird in a cool way. I'd love to just hold one for a few minutes.

Its way out of my league. I'll need this under the 6k price before I could consider it, and I don't really expect that for a few more years.


----------



## ces416 (Apr 12, 2012)

mmmmm.... I think the important thing to remember is that Canon is dealing with two shoppers. The video people and the photo people. This is most likely a "photo people" product. My guess is the canon video team (not cinema eos team) has worked a long time to achieve, 4k in a camera. and now they have. It's novelty.

here's the thing. 99.99% of us have no business shooting 4k. Our stuff will end up at best on a nice 1080 progressive television screen. Most likely the web. All the James Cameron's and Peter Jackson's of tomorrow do. And I guarantee you they aren't going to make their movie in 4:2:2 color space. 

That is why the Alexa does so well. It's got itself into the digital cinema market with a modest resolution of 2k
format. The Pro Res formats are an editors candy. and it has Great frame rates and color depth that you can't dream up. It's great for commercials and television in general. Of course it's also $65,000.

The other thing is the wrapper.
If you are going to use this as a video camera, You probably plan on editing your footage.
The professional world has spoken. Nobody wants to edit 4:2:0 h.264 anymore. The professional wants 10 or 12 bit large files full of dazzling information to control and manipulate how we please.

my wish list:
I hope THE cinema EOS team is working on...
1. Canon 10 or 12 bit raw video format.
2. Perhaps a more affordable version of the C300 <---(Which I love)
3. and maybe 60p at 1080p with a workable video format that isn't h.264

I think the c300 is awesome I got to use it this week for the first time. I can't wait to see what they come
out with next.

What is any non professional going to do with 4k?


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 12, 2012)

*Re: Professional video products*



dilbert said:


> If you go to Canon's USA website, you will not find the 1D_C, C300 or C500 in the consumer digital camera products where the 1DX. 5D3, etc are all found.
> 
> You will find the 1D_C, C300 and C500 under the professional video products part of their website.
> 
> ...



Actually the 1DX, 5D3, all the way down to the 60D and powershots are all under "professional imaging products" as well, so that doesn't really matter.

And it's not that I don't have enough cash and I never complain about price, but I just don't think this camera is worth $15k. And I know there were lots of people that are looking for a large-sensor video camera from Canon that's under $10k, it's a huge segment. Other companies are making cameras in this price range, so why is it so unreasonable to expect something from Canon? I guess this isn't the camera, but I had been hoping that it was since November, so I'm a little disappointed, that's all.


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Apr 12, 2012)

$15K, wow. Canon, your not helping the stereotype of Japanese execs. The play here should have been obvious, add 1000$ to the 1dx, and call it the 1C. Nobody is buying your camcorders anyway. 

I was really hopeful yesterday, now you are going to make me log into my Fidelity account and sell my CAJ. 

CES makes a good point, nobody who wants 4k is going to want to edit in in 4:2:2.


----------



## flanniganj (Apr 12, 2012)

I feel like i've read this thread before. I think if I copied this, did a find/replace of 1D C for 5D Mk III and $15,000 for $3,500, it would be pretty darn close! 

Not a criticism, but it is either that Canon has repeated the same silly mistake, or people in these threads are seldom satisfied. Truth be told it's probably a mix of both. 

Remembering back to marketing courses in college, if you price something and someone agrees to it immediately, then it's too low. However — and this is a big however — if you become known as the overpriced brand, that's something that hangs around your neck for a long time and it's way worse for the bottom line than marginal profit loss.


----------



## Rishaar (Apr 12, 2012)

*Re: READ THE PRESS RELEASE...*



dilbert said:


> _“The Canon EOS-1D C digital SLR camera was designed in response to the needs of filmmakers, television producers, and other high-level motion-imaging professionals,” stated Yuichi Ishizuka, executive vice president and general manager, Imaging Technologies & Communications Group, Canon U.S.A. “Not only does it combine 4K and Full HD video capture with a convenient design, its use of dual CF cards also offers an efficient workflow compatible with today’s post-production requirements.”_
> 
> If you're not in that group of people above then why are you complaining about the price?
> 
> Clearly Canon understands who its target audience is and clearly some people would like to think they're part of a group that quite clearly they're not.



I understand your logic, but in this case why a DSLR? This isn't what "high-level motion-imaging professionals" need.
Thisisnot a specialized video camera, super basic features like SDI or XLR are missing, i mean even the display is 3:2, not even 16:9 !!
This is just an unlocked 1DX


----------



## ces416 (Apr 12, 2012)

Read the brief on the C500 - 10bit (4:2:2) 4K or 12bit (4:4:4) 2K - both at 60fps etc.
[/quote]

Wow i can't believe i missed that! Now that is what I am talking about!

This is a camera I can look forward to.


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 12, 2012)

flanniganj said:


> I feel like i've read this thread before. I think if I copied this, did a find/replace of 1D C for 5D Mk III and $15,000 for $3,500, it would be pretty darn close!
> 
> Not a criticism, but it is either that Canon has repeated the same silly mistake, or people in these threads are seldom satisfied. Truth be told it's probably a mix of both.
> 
> Remembering back to marketing courses in college, if you price something and someone agrees to it immediately, then it's too low. However — and this is a big however — if you become known as the overpriced brand, that's something that hangs around your neck for a long time and it's way worse for the bottom line than marginal profit loss.



Yeah but there were plenty of people that thought the 5DIII was worth $3500, myself included, I would have paid even more for it. But this thing is NOT worth $15,000 in my opinion, that's the difference. It has nothing to do with not being able to afford it, there is just no way I could pay $15k for a DSLR body and not feel like I got ripped off.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Apr 12, 2012)

dkingentertainment said:


> So long canon I'm selling my 5d mark II and moving on to the Sony Nex fs700 for around 8,000.00 and many are doing the same! Canon is putting out what they want and not what people are demanding. They are not even trying to address the competition. This lets me know that they are all about a dollar and so am I! So, I'm spending my money elsewhere. Sorry Team Canon but we have other options now. Keep your DSLR for 15,000 body. More than the Scarlet, you can't be serious.


 
The Sony FS700 is going to cost a lot more than $8000. $10,000 for the body with 4K Ready as soon as a firmware upgrade is released. 

So... Then you can start taking 4K Video - Right?

Wrong, the Camera cannot record 4K Video without a recorder that will record Sony's proprietary 4K codec. So you must spend a few thousand more on the new Sony video recorder to be able to store 4K Video. 

And, the recorder will probably use a $2,000 version of the Sony Memory stick, so add a few of those, and kiss $20K goodbye.

Lets hope you won't have to spend another $2k for special Sony software to edit it.


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 12, 2012)

ces416 said:


> This is most likely a "photo people" product. My guess is the canon video team (not cinema eos team) has worked a long time to achieve, 4k in a camera. and now they have. It's novelty.



Ok first off, it's a Cinema EOS camera, "designed in response to the needs of filmmakers, television producers, and other high-level motion-imaging professionals,” It's not a "photo people" product at all.


----------



## psolberg (Apr 12, 2012)

> 4K video is captured by an approximately APS-H-sized portion of the full image sensor, while Full HD video can be captured in the user’s choice of two different imaging formats:



15 thousand and it can't even record full frame? Duh!!

EOSHD is slamming it.



> The price too is going to be very upsetting to indie filmmakers used to the DSLR revolution, without any alternative DSLR from Canon that even does decent 1080p. I personally feel very bitter that a fledgling 5D Mark II DSLR video revolution was snuffed out with a sub-par video mode on the 5D Mark III in order to make way for a camera I can’t even afford to buy. We don’t want a 4K Hollywood camera we just want decent 1080p at a reasonable price on a full frame stills camera! Or even a C100 to compete with the Sony FS100 sub $6000.
> 
> There’s a very select niche who will be able to afford to buy and use this 4K beast of a DSLR.
> 
> For the rest of us there’s the Sony FS100, Nikon D800 and Panasonic GH2 but not really a compelling option from Canon any more.



I have to agree. The 5D3 is clearly crippled to help sel this thing. The video is so smudged...


----------



## dswatson83 (Apr 12, 2012)

Canon does not have a great history of resolving resolution on video modes. 1080P on the 5D mark III even using the better compression still yielded only 800 lines I read. Somehow I just don't trust Canon at 4k on a 1D-c. Why do I believe that 4k on the 1D-c may look similar to what 1080p SHOULD look like and does look like on most other non DSLR video cameras.


----------



## ces416 (Apr 12, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> ces416 said:
> 
> 
> > This is most likely a "photo people" product. My guess is the canon video team (not cinema eos team) has worked a long time to achieve, 4k in a camera. and now they have. It's novelty.
> ...



Look bro. From whatever angle you look at this thing It's is an instrument of Photography. IT IS A Digital SLR THAT SHOOTS IN 4K. Digital Cinema Cameras across the board don't have shutters in them that flip. even old motion picture film cameras had a rotating shutter wheel. If it looks like a photo camera. Snaps like a photo camera. IT'S A PHOTO CAMERA! (that happens to shoot in 4k). and I promise you at 15,000 film makers and television producers AREN'T GOING TO SHOOT WITH SOMETHING THAT IS A PHOTO CAMERA


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Apr 12, 2012)

I've been the biggest apologist for Canon, but seriously, someone should get fired for this. You hear me Canon?

誰かがこのミスのために解雇されるべきである。


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 12, 2012)

*Re: READ THE PRESS RELEASE...*



dilbert said:


> Given that the cameras (1DC and 1DX) are so similar, you've got to ask "where does the price difference come from?" Is it just different firmware? Or is there also different hardware? What if the difference comes from much more stringent QA that means it requires more human involvement in the process, thus increasing manufacturing cost?



None of the above. A deja vu discussion, but selling price has very little or nothing to do with manufacturing costs. Why is a 1DsIII triple the cost of a 5DII? A combination of two main factors - charging what the market will bear, and expected sales volume. 

In the case of the 1D C vs. the 1D X, it's evident that Canon expects to sell far fewer of the 1D C than the 1D X, and priced it accordingly. Best recent example - the Nikon D800 vs. D800E, essentially the same camera (in fact, the D800E is missing something the D800 has!), so why is the -E variant $300 more? Nikon expects to sell fewer of them...


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Apr 12, 2012)

Neuro, I agree with the theory. But I think the analysts are sh*tting the bed on this one. I think their estimated hypothetical sales of "X" at this price, are off by about "X".


----------



## drs (Apr 12, 2012)

A full frame HD option and real 4K output, sounds good to me. I never got the promised 4K and have then only HD as output (C300) which is just odd. Reminded me on the Bayern pattern discussion years ago, what resolution is really available. Anyway, the price point and the specifications seems to target the RED Scarlet a lot.

What bugs is the 8 bit stuff, that seems so yesterday and not really sufficient if they really want to target us (the VFX artists) with that camera. However, we all have seen what Shane Hurlbut was able to pull off even from the tiny 5Dm2 (tiny compared to the productions he does), and with the cinematic curve applied now to the material (I hope Technicolor was involved into that), then the hopes might go up even more.

However, the torrent of new cameras makes me wonder what will happen next, certainly NAB will unveil a lot of new stuff. Then the prices will drop with so much competition. I do not feel very safe these days to invest money in the next few month, but I have to. I'm curious what this year will offer, a lot I guess.


----------



## dswatson83 (Apr 12, 2012)

The 5D mark II only became popular for video once people realized that they could create movies that looked amazing with a $2500 camera and $500 lens. Before, they had previously been relying on expensive systems which kept many people out of the business. We decided it was worth it to deal with the cumbersome body types, impractical focusing, crappy formats that made editing difficult and grading worse, lack of ND filters and XLR audio inputs, horrible rolling shutter, and other stuff IF we could make great movies with $750 - $5000 budgets. Canon has it ALL WRONG. We don't want DSLR video cameras. They suck for video. We want great video quality for DSLR prices and with the 5D mark II, it became mostly possible. Sony, Panasonic, and RED are doing it right and trying to bring 35mm or APS-C chip dedicated video cameras (with real video features) into DSLR prices. I was kind of hoping that since Canon's $800 60d with 3 year old tech can take some pretty amazing video, for $3000, they should be able to make that breathtaking. Guess not.


----------



## seanmcr6 (Apr 12, 2012)

In the video post 2 months ago, the Canon guy clearly said they didn't have a proper codec to output 10 bit 422...so they had to use the codec from their XF cam line. (talking about the C300 here) In that video, he stated it takes a good 2 years to develop your own codec. So that would be about now.

The C500 and 1Dc are evolutionary products. These cameras obviously use a new codec. This allows these camera's to process and output what the original cameras should have been able to when they were released.

The 1Dc is exactly a 1Dx with the new codec. That's it. I think it's rather ridiculous that Canon charges an extra $8k for (basically) a codec upgrade. 

Time will tell what the price of the C500 is, but I can assure you it will be much more than the $16K that the C300 it. Although, in my opinion, the C500 is simply the camera the C300 should have been...and it should remain at the $16K price point.

Canon has been in the video game for a long, long time. They understand who their customers are and how to make money from them. That's business.

The convergence of photography and videography/filmmaking was unexpected (something Canon has stated a few times) and they are just trying to run with it as best they can. Unfortunately, it is the hobbyist and semi-pro's who are doing all the complaining. I would put the C500 (based on spec sheet) up against a $65,000 alexa. That's an impressive move forward. The C500 also has better output specs than the Red Scarlet....so as long as it performs as stated, it won't be at that price point. Probably closer to the Epic. I still feel like that would be a mistake....but I'm confident that's the comparisons and price points Canon will use.


----------



## tjc320 (Apr 12, 2012)

...and here I thought the C300 was priced too high! 


I would buy the C300 over this. Here is why: Because I don't need 4K video. I want the 4K sensor but I really don't need 4K video. In the last two years I can't think of one job where I would have used it. The convenience of the C300's body, form factor, and features put it over the 1D Cinema. 

For this price I can buy the FS-700 (a camera packed with features) in addition to a Canon 5D Mark III as a B camera as well as a stills camera. 

I think that 90% of video shooters could do without the photography features in the 1D Cinema. So why are they in there other than to inflate the price and avoid having to rework a camera style. 

Seriously...$15,000 is just ridiculous. Get real Canon.


----------



## epiem (Apr 12, 2012)

WOW, I was hoping for $8000, EXPECTING more like $9000 to $10,000, but $15,000 GTFO 

This isn't a "DLSR" it's their C300 with a few less things for almost the same price.

If I'm gunna spend this much money, I rather buy a R.E.D. Scarlet
at least I KNOW what I'm getting.

WTH is Canon doing....


----------



## Caps18 (Apr 12, 2012)

First, I'm not the target consumer for this product. 

But, I think the currency issues going on around the world are impacting prices faster than what people 'expect' prices to be.

Second, this will be marketed to large TV/movie studios as a way to get great video (that is 'future proof'), but don't want to use 'amateur' 5Dm2's.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 12, 2012)

"Unlike the C300, the EOS-1D C does not offer zebra striping or peaking focus aids, which the company sees as being more important in single-person operated documentary settings, rather than the rig-and-crew situations it expects the 1D C to be used in."

But considering how trivial those are to add (even ML people added it in come on!) why on Earth leave them out? What about the times they are used outside of rig-and-crew? Seems beyond bizarre.

AND more to the 5D3 point, why did they NOT put those two things (plus 1.6x crop 1920x1080 video) in the 5D3?!?! 

They just indirectly admitted above that the 5D3 will often be used as single-person operated and thus in dire need of such abilities!

They just make no sense in their actions.

Who is running the roost? Sounds like marketing guys who never picked up a cam in their life and just randomly try to find way to segment products so they can give interesting business presentations.

Do they not read how badly they are getting blasted all over movie filming boards about leaving those basic little things out?

Why? Why?

Just such minor little changes from their marketing department and they could get a 180 degree difference response to their products. Enough with the silly segmentation and games playing already. Wow.


----------



## tjc320 (Apr 12, 2012)

epiem said:


> WOW, I was hoping for $8000, EXPECTING more like $9000 to $10,000, but $15,000 GTFO
> 
> This isn't a "DLSR" it's their C300 with a few less things for almost the same price.
> 
> ...



Keep in mind a Scarlet will cost you about $25,000 after buying everything you need. That's another 10K so it's not really comparable. You may be able to get buy with spending $20,000 but you'll be limited. 

While it's true that the 1D Cinema doesn't have all the features that the C300 has - it does have one major thing over it: 4K output.


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 12, 2012)

ces416 said:


> Look bro. From whatever angle you look at this thing It's is an instrument of Photography. IT IS A Digital SLR THAT SHOOTS IN 4K. Digital Cinema Cameras across the board don't have shutters in them that flip. even old motion picture film cameras had a rotating shutter wheel. If it looks like a photo camera. Snaps like a photo camera. IT'S A PHOTO CAMERA! (that happens to shoot in 4k). and I promise you at 15,000 film makers and television producers AREN'T GOING TO SHOOT WITH SOMETHING THAT IS A PHOTO CAMERA



How many references to cinema, filmmakers, and directors do there need to be for you to accept that this was made with filmmakers in mind? Why are they releasing it at NAB and not a photo expo? 

You can call it a still camera if you want, but this isn't being marketed towards photographers, it's under "video cameras,'" and it's part of the CINEMA EOS line, so how exactly is this not supposed to appeal to filmmakers? I guarantee you more filmmakers will use this than photographers. I'm sure the majority of photographers would prefer a 2 1DX's over this thing. There are absolutely no advantages to the 1DC over the 1DX in terms of stills, so why would a photographer want to spend $7k more?

People have gotten used to shooting video with DSLRs and have spent thousands of dollars working around it's form factor and all the recent video camera releases have had a more modular design. They shoot commercials, TV shows, movies with a 5DII/7D/5DIII, why in the hell would they reject this just because of the ergonomics? If the image quality is good, people are going to use it, bottom line. Oh and I'm not your bro.


----------



## gene_can_sing (Apr 12, 2012)

Canon has completely JUMPED the Shark lately with their very overpriced Video offerings. 

Contrary to what many stills people have been posting, just because you work in TV (as I do), does NOT mean that I want to spend an arm and a leg for a sub-performing video camera like what Canon has been offering.

I had about $8K to spend on a camera, and now I'm afraid it's going to Sony who is going to clean house in the $4K to $10K range because of Canon's many miss-steps in video.

They need to replace their marketing division in video because they just keep missing the mark.

No matter how much cash you have, if you're smart, you still want what's best for you money, and Canon video is NOT that.


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 12, 2012)

gene_can_sing said:


> Canon has completely JUMPED the Shark lately with their very overpriced Video offerings.
> 
> Contrary to what many stills people have been posting, just because you work in TV (as I do), does NOT mean that I want to spend an arm and a leg for a sub-performing video camera like what Canon has been offering.
> 
> ...



We can only hope that Canon has something else planned down the line, but I'm not going to hold my breath. If this camera had higher frame rates, built-in ND's, and a host of other features I wouldn't complain at all, but from what I've seen the thing just isn't worth $15k, there are so many alternatives in that price range it just doesn't seem like a standout.


----------



## ces416 (Apr 12, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> ces416 said:
> 
> 
> > Look bro. From whatever angle you look at this thing It's is an instrument of Photography. IT IS A Digital SLR THAT SHOOTS IN 4K. Digital Cinema Cameras across the board don't have shutters in them that flip. even old motion picture film cameras had a rotating shutter wheel. If it looks like a photo camera. Snaps like a photo camera. IT'S A PHOTO CAMERA! (that happens to shoot in 4k). and I promise you at 15,000 film makers and television producers AREN'T GOING TO SHOOT WITH SOMETHING THAT IS A PHOTO CAMERA
> ...



No one cares what it's being marketed as. Put it next to a Playstation 3 on a the Sony website doesn't make it a Gaming system. 
If this is in fact a digital cinema camera. Shouldn't the majority of the features resemble that?

Where are the XLR inputs?
An adjustable screen maybe?

By the way... If you tell any major production company that you are going to shoot a tv show primarily with DSLR's you'd give someone a heart attack. The reason TV shows used Those cameras is because of their affordable price. I promise you, nobody would have ever used a 5d Mark II if it cost $15,000
show me a show that shoots "regularly". on a 7d

And I'm sorry about the bro comment... that was rude.


----------



## tjc320 (Apr 12, 2012)

ces416 said:


> No one cares what it's being marketed as. Put it next to a Playstation 3 on a the Sony website doesn't make it a Gaming system.
> If this is in fact a digital cinema camera. Shouldn't the majority of the features resemble that?
> 
> Where are the XLR inputs?
> ...



I think you're both 100% accurate. It is a camera made for still photos. However, they are marketing it towards filmmakers. This, I think, is the fundamental reason why Canon is completely screwing themselves. I'm assuming they have a plan for these cameras and a long term goal for the line as a whole. Right now, I just don't see it. They sure aren't making it clear either. 

I think Canon just needs to listen to users first and look at what their market is and how they can best compete with other companies. 

A lot of info on these cameras should surface in the next few weeks that could help. Maybe they will lower the price like they did with the C300. Who knows...do they (Canon)?


----------



## bp (Apr 12, 2012)

ces416 said:


> show me a show that shoots "regularly". on a 7d



Last Call with Carson Daly
They shoot with 5D's and 7D's


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 12, 2012)

ces416 said:


> No one cares what it's being marketed as. Put it next to a Playstation 3 on a the Sony website doesn't make it a Gaming system.
> If this is in fact a digital cinema camera. Shouldn't the majority of the features resemble that?
> 
> Where are the XLR inputs?
> ...



Ok, I get it, you would never use this camera for a video production, but that doesn't mean the rest of the world feels the same way. I would imagine people would love to use it as a B cam or in tight situations (which is the reason they used the 5DII on House). People use rigs, external recorders and external monitors, and this cam would function just as well using said equipment. I think this thing is crazy overpriced regardless, but I can see people opting for it in certain situations. It's kinda hard to judge until we see the footage coming out of it, it could be ridiculously incredibly awesome, and in that case I'm sure it would be well received. I think if the resolution is really amazing that people would be willing to deal with the hassles involved with shooting with a DSLR body. We'll see.


----------



## mccrum (Apr 12, 2012)

"Honey, you know how we've been saving to buy a car? I got a camera instead!"

$15,000. And there are a lot of people who are going to buy two. Wow.

What's a Hasselblad up to these days, maybe I'll get back into film...


----------



## gene_can_sing (Apr 12, 2012)

mccrum said:


> "Honey, you know how we've been saving to buy a car? I got a camera instead!"
> 
> $15,000. And there are a lot of people who are going to buy two. Wow.
> 
> What's a Hasselblad up to these days, maybe I'll get back into film...



I guarantee the 1D-C will be a flop. I work in video and TV, and people are pretty bummed about it, especially since it's $15K.

The super high end Canon going for $35K. Now that camera seems to be worth the price because it's way up there in performance, but the 1D-X just seems like the world's most expensive firmware update.

Canon video is going to lose their shirts, and Sony is going to capitalize big time.


----------



## JR (Apr 13, 2012)

gene_can_sing said:


> mccrum said:
> 
> 
> > "Honey, you know how we've been saving to buy a car? I got a camera instead!"
> ...



Not sure about that but it does feel like the video group is in charge now does it!


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Apr 13, 2012)

Like I said before, what irks me is that 1D-C is virtually a 1D-X with a video firmware which means that theoretically the 1DX should be capable of delivering the same image. The only difference being is that Canon knows that they cannot milk 16K from stills photographers but hope they can do so from the video crowd.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 13, 2012)

gene_can_sing said:


> I guarantee the 1D-C will be a flop. I work in video and TV, and people are pretty bummed about it, especially since it's $15K.
> 
> Canon video is going to lose their shirts, and Sony is going to capitalize big time.



Gene_has_been_singing_this_tune_for_months. 

I used to work in academic science. My lab mates and I would go to a scientific meeting, see the latest golliwog instrument, and say wow that's great, but no one will ever buy that, it costs way too much. Now I work in pharma, and I have a multimillion dollar annual capital budget - what was insanely overpriced before is now quite affordable. Point is, Canon seems to be targeting big-budget studios and filmmakers with their recent cinema releases (note: they call it the Cinema EOS line, _not_ the 'video' line), and not indie filmmakers. Canon's goal isn't to please everyone, it's to turn a profit. If the quality is high, just as I have no problem spending $1MM on a piece of scientific instrumentation, major studios will have no problem spending $15K on a camera. Heck, buy ten, they're cheap. Probably not a flop, again, provided it delivers on quality.


----------



## AG (Apr 13, 2012)

*Re: READ THE PRESS RELEASE...*



Rishaar said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > _“The Canon EOS-1D C digital SLR camera was designed in response to the needs of filmmakers, television producers, and other high-level motion-imaging professionals,” stated Yuichi Ishizuka, executive vice president and general manager, Imaging Technologies & Communications Group, Canon U.S.A. “Not only does it combine 4K and Full HD video capture with a convenient design, its use of dual CF cards also offers an efficient workflow compatible with today’s post-production requirements.”_
> ...



I can clear this up easily.

Form Factor. 

Take for example the episode of house that was shot on the 5D2, The reason why they used that camera was due to its size, it was able to produce nice pictures and be able to be positioned in awkward spots to attain the best angles. Something that you can not do with a camera in a rig/cage or large footprint (ARRI etc).

The 1D-C increases the viewing format but keeps the form factor. 

Its that simple.

As for those bitching about the price, its like point & shoot users complaining the xD series are too expensive. When in reality an xxxD would suit their needs.


----------



## AG (Apr 13, 2012)

gene_can_sing said:


> Canon video is going to lose their shirts, and Sony is going to capitalize big time.



If Sonys bankruptcy issues are true, they are going to hope its a flop for Canon.

Lets be honest for $15,000 your basically paying $7000 for a 1D-X and the extra $8000 for the 1D-C but bundled into the one body.

The more i think about it the more it makes sense, sure its overpriced and should possibly be around the $12k mark tops, but for my area (film not TV) i can see many uses.

Just the cost savings from using lighter/smaller jibs and dollies would justify the cost of this camera in no time.
Plus imagine the cheap remote controlled heli shots you could get with something like this.


----------



## ces416 (Apr 13, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> ces416 said:
> 
> 
> > No one cares what it's being marketed as. Put it next to a Playstation 3 on a the Sony website doesn't make it a Gaming system.
> ...




I think we'll see a price drop in the coming weeks, like we did the c300. And with Modern NLE updates like the new Premiere pro. It does make it easier to edit h.264.

i do agree the commercial niche has been swinging to the DSLR market for smaller budgets.

So in some cases this would be and useful weapon in the arsenal. 

Good dialogue, Axilrod. you making it to NAB this year?


----------



## jlev23 (Apr 13, 2012)

WTH??? why doesn't the 5dMK3 have this: 
"and the ability to view the camera’s LCD even when the HDMI port is connected to an external monitor"
if they thought it was such a big deal to mention it means they know we care about it, grrrrrr.


----------



## vetch_vicia (Apr 13, 2012)

I think u guy seem miss a point here. Remembered read an interview at DPreview quite few months ago, the guy is war photographer and what he said was now the news agency are more demanding to have video upload spot on to the website. 

I quite believe Canon develop this Eos 1 c to serve a need to those photo journalist that need a good rugged still camera which also take high quality video at the same time and with this price point , 15k, it's a lot cheaper than to deploy two team of journalist to the field (one for still and one for video). 

Surely, 15k$ might bother Joe Public like me but I don't think Reuter or AP will ever bother, if they got a 4k video hand on just right after Gaddafi got stabbed to dead.


----------



## AG (Apr 13, 2012)

vetch_vicia said:


> I think u guy seem miss a point here. Remembered read an interview at DPreview quite few months ago, the guy is war photographer and what he said was now the news agency are more demanding to have video upload spot on to the website.
> 
> I quite believe Canon develop this Eos 1 c to serve a need to those photo journalist that need a good rugged still camera which also take high quality video at the same time and with this price point , 15k, it's a lot cheaper than to deploy two team of journalist to the field (one for still and one for video).
> 
> Surely, 15k$ might bother Joe Public like me but I don't think Reuter or AP will ever bother, if they got a 4k video hand on just right after Gaddafi got stabbed to dead.



Thats why the 1DX and 5D3 do video. 

Have you tried to upload anything over 720p* quickly* to the internet using nothing but a 3G connection?


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Apr 13, 2012)

As an economist I see one reason that this price could make sense: Canon must have made a large volume sale to a big entity/network at a negotiated price.


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 13, 2012)

neuroanatomist said:


> gene_can_sing said:
> 
> 
> > I guarantee the 1D-C will be a flop. I work in video and TV, and people are pretty bummed about it, especially since it's $15K.
> ...



yes but there is so much more competition in the upper zone and it's hard to be revolutionary there when you have prices up there too

there 5 series was the revolution for them


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 13, 2012)

vetch_vicia said:


> I think u guy seem miss a point here. Remembered read an interview at DPreview quite few months ago, the guy is war photographer and what he said was now the news agency are more demanding to have video upload spot on to the website.
> 
> I quite believe Canon develop this Eos 1 c to serve a need to those photo journalist that need a good rugged still camera which also take high quality video at the same time and with this price point , 15k, it's a lot cheaper than to deploy two team of journalist to the field (one for still and one for video).
> 
> Surely, 15k$ might bother Joe Public like me but I don't think Reuter or AP will ever bother, if they got a 4k video hand on just right after Gaddafi got stabbed to dead.



What in the world do they need 4k for that? On the spot 4k uploads from the field??
Canon even left out zebras and focus peaking because they said they were not aiming at even single cam production film nevermind that. (and they also admitted that they sure as heck NEED, MUST add those zebras, peaks and crops to the 5D3!)


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 13, 2012)

ces416 said:


> I think we'll see a price drop in the coming weeks, like we did the c300. And with Modern NLE updates like the new Premiere pro. It does make it easier to edit h.264.
> 
> i do agree the commercial niche has been swinging to the DSLR market for smaller budgets.
> 
> ...



Thanks man, you too. And I agree being able to edit H.264 natively is nice, but uncompressed sure would be nice too. 
I'm anxious to see what kind of results you can get out of that 500mbit MJPEG mode.
The EOSHD guy had some interesting things to say about it  http://www.eoshd.com/content/7900/making-sense-of-the-canon-cinema-1d-4k-dslr-from-a-film-industry-perspective

No I won't be making it to NAB this year, I have a shoot this weekend so it just wouldn't work out, but I really wish I could. Are you?


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 13, 2012)

vetch_vicia said:


> I think u guy seem miss a point here. Remembered read an interview at DPreview quite few months ago, the guy is war photographer and what he said was now the news agency are more demanding to have video upload spot on to the website.
> 
> I quite believe Canon develop this Eos 1 c to serve a need to those photo journalist that need a good rugged still camera which also take high quality video at the same time and with this price point , 15k, it's a lot cheaper than to deploy two team of journalist to the field (one for still and one for video).
> 
> Surely, 15k$ might bother Joe Public like me but I don't think Reuter or AP will ever bother, if they got a 4k video hand on just right after Gaddafi got stabbed to dead.



Working with 4k video isn't ideal for photojournalism in the slightest bit, it's complete overkill. It's just too much video power for someone that doesnt work in the production world. It would make way more sense for a photographer to get 2 1DX's and still be able to shoot great 1080p which is much easier to work with and performs exactly the same as the 1DC on the still side. This is a camera for the cinema world and nothing else. Anyone that is willing to buy this camera is going to be a serious filmmaker or a photographer with too much money, but it won't be a camera that tons of photographers run out and buy.


----------



## Edwin Herdman (Apr 13, 2012)

The back of the camera looks (I can only see the small pictures on the CR front page at the moment) like it's suited for video production. So no, Neuro, it's not just the red "C" badge on front.

The back panel also shows us something about the "no flip screen" worries - that is something that would be inappropriate for a rugged $15K camera where you are going to use that HDMI output to drive a bunch of monitors remotely, possibly including a focus puller. It would probably be a nice feature to have in some cases, but not at the cost of reliability. It is probably a feature we'll continue to see on the cheaper cameras, though.


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Apr 13, 2012)

The back image is of the C500. I know, I also thought it's the 1D-C at first.


----------



## Ranga (Apr 13, 2012)

Any thinking videographer/photographer would get 2 cameras for that price (unless of course they wanna show off their toys ) 1D-X for stills and an FS700 for video would come to around $15k with more video friendly features from the FS700. FS700 gets you high frame rates/ND filters/XLR inputs/SDI. The reason HDDSLRs caught on was because of the price point.

Personally I would have opted for a lower mega pixel still camera with features slightly higher than the 60D.


----------



## epiem (Apr 13, 2012)

dilbert said:


> I still think that if it had of been announced at $8k, people would have been saying "Why isn't it $4k?".
> 
> If you're a professional and this is what you need then you work on your budget and find a way to make it fit and bring it into your tool set, not complain that it is a few $ more than you've saved.



It's not about how much money you have saved, it's about which other companies offer a better product for less.

I have an affair with Canon, but their pricing on some of their newer items are just too high. 
When others are doing it equally as good, if not better, FOR LESS, then why do I want to stick around.


Obviously, there are TONS of people out there who feel the same way.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 13, 2012)

Edwin Herdman said:


> The back of the camera looks (I can only see the small pictures on the CR front page at the moment) like it's suited for video production. So no, Neuro, it's not just the red "C" badge on front..



Indeed...as David stated, there are two different cameras in that image - front view of 1D C and back view of C500. The back of the 1D C is just like the back of the 1D X.


----------



## ces416 (Apr 13, 2012)

Axilrod said:


> ces416 said:
> 
> 
> > I think we'll see a price drop in the coming weeks, like we did the c300. And with Modern NLE updates like the new Premiere pro. It does make it easier to edit h.264.
> ...




Yeah, first time. My co-worker and I finally got the company to fork over some cash for us to fly out. I'm hoping to catch the Canon seminar on Sunday evening but we're leaving from Nashville that morning. So it will probably be cutting it close. Crossing my fingers.


----------



## Caps18 (Apr 13, 2012)

dilbert said:


> If you received a 20% pay raise tomorrow, would you still feel aggrieved about the prices?



A lot of people are engrained with a way to judge prices based on their upbringing and life experiences. My parents wouldn't spend more than a dime on a candy bar, but they should be 50 cents to me. I won't pay $1 for a candy bar unless I'm desperate for food and a convince store is the only place around.

It's the same thing with houses. I can't see how anyone would spend $200,000 for a house unless they are a doctor or businessman... Houses cost $150k to me. Anything more is expensive, anything less is cheap.

Strange financial psychology, but it has an impact on the economy.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 13, 2012)

Caps18 said:


> It's the same thing with houses. I can't see how anyone would spend $200,000 for a house unless they are a doctor or businessman... Houses cost $150k to me. Anything more is expensive, anything less is cheap.



I'd love to be able to get a $150K house around here. In this area, sometimes _parking spaces_ sell for over $100K.


----------



## gene_can_sing (Apr 13, 2012)

I find it strange that so many are defending Canon on their outrageous video pricing.

If you look at the upcoming Sony FS-700 being offered at $10K with all the video bells and whistles, future proof 4K resolution and shoots up to 960 fps. Now that's INNOVATION. And the results? Video people are singing Sony's praises for offering such cutting edge tech at a good price. Sony is going to sell a LOT of cameras.

Now Canon on the other hand, very over-priced, underspec'd video offerings and the results? Luke warm to very negative reactions across with board with very, very few people singing their praises.

Moral of the story, consumers, no matter if they are amateurs or professionals all want the same thing. Value for their money. Canon is not doing it, at least with video. Sony is, and the video sales will be reflected accordingly.

The strangest thing is the the C-500 has extremely amazing Specs. and is cheap at $35K. That's a camera that is about half of what the camera's is competing against RED and Alexa around $60K to $70K.

It's like Canon video has decided that they want to undercut the high end, but way over-charge on the low to mid end where their core customers are. Strange strategy since High end products make little money and it's the low to mid end is where all the profit is. They have really lost their direction. 

But it's a tough decision to jump ship because I have all L lenses so Canon basically owns me and my future children and grand children.


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 13, 2012)

dilbert said:


> If you received a 20% pay raise tomorrow, would you still feel aggrieved about the prices?



I know this wasn't directed at me, but the amount of money I have wouldn't change anything, as of now I still feel like it's overpriced. But I'd like to see the image quality before I make a final judgement. Considering the alternatives out there, it just seems like it's not worth $15k for what you're getting, but we'll see.


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 13, 2012)

ces416 said:


> Yeah, first time. My co-worker and I finally got the company to fork over some cash for us to fly out. I'm hoping to catch the Canon seminar on Sunday evening but we're leaving from Nashville that morning. So it will probably be cutting it close. Crossing my fingers.



That's awesome man! I hope you guys have a good time, and let us know if you see anything really cool (I'm sure you'll see tons of it). Haha I'll be headed to Knoxville while you're leaving Nashville, doing some sessions with the bands playing at the Rhythm & Blooms festival next weekend.


----------



## Axilrod (Apr 13, 2012)

gene_can_sing said:


> I find it strange that so many are defending Canon on their outrageous video pricing.
> 
> If you look at the upcoming Sony FS-700 being offered at $10K with all the video bells and whistles, future proof 4K resolution and shoots up to 960 fps. Now that's INNOVATION. And the results? Video people are singing Sony's praises for offering such cutting edge tech at a good price. Sony is going to sell a LOT of cameras.
> 
> ...



But what if the image quality from this thing is crushing the Scarlett and FS700, wouldn't that make a difference? I would think it would have to produce some pretty amazing results for anyone to opt for it over the C300. And being to shoot 4K out of the box onto CF cards is nice, who knows how much the final cost will be on the FS700 with the external recorder and whatever else they need to get 4k out of it. I was talking with my Canon dealer this morning and he said he thinks the actual price will be a couple grand less when it's released, so it could end up being less. Either way, I think lots of people (myself included) were hoping that this would be the video solution for them, but it's not. And as much as that sucks, we just have to wait it out and hope that Canon releases something awesome in the $5k-$8k range.


----------



## neuroanatomist (Apr 13, 2012)

gene_can_sing said:


> I find it strange that so many are defending Canon on their ... video pricing.



Explaining, not defending. They don't need defending, they will charge what they choose, and frankly, they don't care what you, me, or any individual consumers think about their pricing for the Cinema line. 

Remember, Canon places the Cinema EOS system entirely within the B2B market segment - they are marketing to studios, not individuals. That's a key difference. Yes, corporations are made up of individuals, and ultimately it's individuals employed by those studios who will make the buying decisions. But when I buy something as a consumer, I look at the price and compare it to my budget - I'm spending my own money. When I buy something as an employee of a company, I'm spending _someone else's money_...which makes the buying decision a lot easier, and cost less relevant to the purchase decision.


----------



## transpo1 (Apr 13, 2012)

I'm a filmmaker and producer/director, so a low price would really benefit me. But Canon is generally a conservative company. They release things at prices at which they can make a profit. And judging by Sony's books lately, Canon may be preserving their financial position by playing it safe with pricing. 

In my mind, they should release something in the $7-8k range in addition to the 1D C- for instance, how about a 5D C that does full (resolved) HD w/4k? My hunch is that they will probably consider something like this in the future but not until after they've milked the pro cinema market for the $12-15k 1D C. Because they know if they released a similar model in the $7-8k range the pro cinema people would just buy that. 

They want to make money and are following the rule that if everyone agrees to the pricing right away, you are pricing too low. All that being said, I really would like the 1D C at $10k


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (Apr 13, 2012)

Caps18 said:


> dilbert said:
> 
> 
> > If you received a 20% pay raise tomorrow, would you still feel aggrieved about the prices?
> ...



You must live in the South or parts of the Midwest!

A modest, regular little old house is like 280k+ in many parts of the country these days. 

I noticed that the same company built my old apartment in both Los Angeles and in the South and it was $800 a month in one place and $2600 a month in the other!


----------



## JR (Apr 13, 2012)

LetTheRightLensIn said:


> Caps18 said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



Off topic but my $1500 a month appart in montreal cost me over $2500 a month in LA and the built quality was worst! I wish i could find a $150k hiuse near where i live....Tis way i could buy more lenses. :


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Apr 13, 2012)

transpo1 said:


> In my mind, they should release something in the $7-8k range in addition to the 1D C- for instance, how about a 5D C that does full (resolved) HD w/4k? My hunch is that they will probably consider something like this in the future but not until after they've milked the pro cinema market for the $12-15k 1D C. Because they know if they released a similar model in the $7-8k range the pro cinema people would just buy that.



But there are $8K models out there, just not by Canon, so why won't people by those instead?


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Apr 13, 2012)

I'm all for the 5C,

If dual digi can get me 500Mbit, 1 digi5 should get us 250Mbit. Which would be good enough for 10bit 1080p.


----------



## Stephen Melvin (Apr 14, 2012)

dilbert said:


> I still think that if it had of been announced at $8k, people would have been saying "Why isn't it $4k?".
> 
> If you're a professional and this is what you need then you work on your budget and find a way to make it fit and bring it into your tool set, not complain that it is a few $ more than you've saved.





epiem said:


> It's not about how much money you have saved, it's about which other companies offer a better product for less.



Who has a better product for less? I haven't seen any referenced in any of the posts complaining about the price. The Sony, for instance, is incapable of 4K video at this time. And it will likely be more expensive once you put together all of the pieces necessary to make it work, not to mention being a larger form factor.


----------



## psolberg (Apr 14, 2012)

http://www.eoshd.com/content/7919/a-canon-video-camera-for-the-rest-of-us-outside-hollywood

Excellent post about the lack of consumer focus from canon latest Hollywood priced cameras. Fully agree with eoshd here.


----------



## epiem (Apr 14, 2012)

dilbert said:


> epiem said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



Considering my business *IS* video and Photography, I would purchase the best TOOL for the job.

The price -for what it's worth- is not that great.

There are Sony Cameras out there that boast similar or better specs for less.
Plus this is supposed to be a DSLR...Why on earth would I spend that amount of money for a "still" camera that *happens* to have video.

If it was a full blown video camera, like the c300, there 'might' be consideration.
But still, there are better items on the market for less.

Looking at the cost of one of those, I rather break the bank and just invest in a R.E.D.

I was really hoping Canon would surprise us with goodness, but it's looking like it gunna be overly expensive "crap"


----------



## jlev23 (Apr 14, 2012)

the RED Scarlet is cheaper, i actually think the new canon will be a great camera, but people like to go with what works outs cheaper. you can get the scarlet pkg that included a monitor, batteries, drives, for about the same price.
they have to make the new canon cinema body cheaper then the scarlet body, then i would buy one in a second.
for this type of market its all about making your money back as fast as you can.
one more shoot on my 5DMKIII and ill make my body price back!


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Apr 14, 2012)

Does anyone think there will be a 5C?


----------



## JR (Apr 15, 2012)

HurtinMinorKey said:


> Does anyone think there will be a 5C?



I dont think so. This would make to many model. I could be wrong but i find it risky to launch so many product with "small" variation. Tis might become expensive to manage for them...


----------



## HurtinMinorKey (Apr 15, 2012)

^but it would just be firmware, just like the 1C. They could use a 4:4:4 1080 cam.


----------



## Shawn_Lights (Apr 15, 2012)

*Re: READ THE PRESS RELEASE...*



AG said:


> Rishaar said:
> 
> 
> > dilbert said:
> ...



I'm with you. As a filmmaker I would love this camera. High resolution in a small dslr form factor. Also it'll do great stills. Sold! However, I can't afford it. Just because I can't afford it doesn't mean Canon are out their minds when pricing it at 15k. Just means I need to work on gaining better gigs.

Honestly there is no other camera like this. A 4k dslr that stores media on CF cards.

I also see people making mistakes when comparing this camera to others. Sony's FS700 looks amazing, however it won't have the form factor of the 1DX C and it's not just $8k. You have to buy an external recorder that will cost thousands. Does great slow-motion, but I'll take resolution over that.

The RED Scarlet cost more than $10 to put you in the position to shoot. Then you have to buy their expensive storage cards.

What I don't see being mentioned is the fact that these Canon cameras are editing ready. They're ready to be used in your NLE system now. For RED cameras you need to change up your entire workflow.

$15k is a bit steep, I'm thinking it'll drop to a little over $10k. If so, hopefully people will stop whining. Consumers seem to want it all at dirt cheap.

The best bargain is the FS100 right now. However if you want something that provides more, you're going to have to pay more. In all actuality, $15k is pretty cheap.


----------



## BRNexus6 (Apr 15, 2012)

The Sony FS700 is going to find a lot of happy homes, especially if the metabones adapter works for it. 300FPS slow-motion at 1080p, built in ND filters, future 4k upgrade, great low-light ability, $8,000 price tag. How can the C300 compete with the new Sony FS700 at twice the price with less features? 

The C300 can't even do 1080 60p for christsakes.


----------



## gibbygoo (Apr 16, 2012)

[/quote]

Working with 4k video isn't ideal for photojournalism in the slightest bit, it's complete overkill. It's just too much video power for someone that doesnt work in the production world. It would make way more sense for a photographer to get 2 1DX's and still be able to shoot great 1080p which is much easier to work with and performs exactly the same as the 1DC on the still side. This is a camera for the cinema world and nothing else. Anyone that is willing to buy this camera is going to be a serious filmmaker or a photographer with too much money, but it won't be a camera that tons of photographers run out and buy. 
[/quote]

What about sports shooters?


----------



## gibbygoo (Apr 16, 2012)

Ranga said:


> Any thinking videographer/photographer would get 2 cameras for that price (unless of course they wanna show off their toys ) 1D-X for stills and an FS700 for video would come to around $15k with more video friendly features from the FS700. FS700 gets you high frame rates/ND filters/XLR inputs/SDI. The reason HDDSLRs caught on was because of the price point.
> 
> Personally I would have opted for a lower mega pixel still camera with features slightly higher than the 60D.



That's exactly what I'm doing, and for those exact reasons, especially the XLR and frame rates. I couldn't care less about the 4K. When I stop doing regional tv commercial spots and start doing mass-market feature films for IMAX, I might change my tune.

Sorry Canon. Not interested. The vast majority of video producers on this planet are not going to be interested, either. I can afford it, but for $15K my $ is better spent elsewhere.


----------



## BRNexus6 (Apr 16, 2012)

dilbert said:


> BRNexus6 said:
> 
> 
> > The Sony FS700 is going to find a lot of happy homes, especially if the metabones adapter works for it. 300FPS slow-motion at 1080p, built in ND filters, future 4k upgrade, great low-light ability, $8,000 price tag. How can the C300 compete with the new Sony FS700 at twice the price with less features?
> ...



Prove to me how the C300 isn't overpriced compared to the FS700.


----------



## AG (Apr 16, 2012)

gibbygoo said:


> What about sports shooters?



If your a photojournalist you are not a "sports shooter" who takes video with your DSLR camera.

When they say photojournalist they mean (for example) the guy that is taking *photos* of the war in wherever. While they are there and they see an act of XYZ happening, they can quickly switch their camera to video shoot it, then via their 3G phone upload the video to their home office to broadcast to the world. 

If it takes this guy 30 mins to send the footage back to home base when in the field and he is shooting 720p. How long do you think it will take on average to send a 4K file?

Sports shooters are a different breed. If they are taking photos they are not wanting to try and shoot video with their super telephoto lenses....and even less so at 4K. Their camera set ups are designed for one purpose and one purpose only. Taking photos.

If you are talking about sports shooters (video) then thats a completely different field. 
These guys shoot large format cameras that are cabled to the main van in the carpark that broadcasts the footage to the main station for editing. They are not going to be using DSLRs, maybe Go Pros in places like the goals but not usually for live coverage (Tom Guilmette is the exception to this rule).

But on saying all this there is no point in shooting 4K in this realm until the average home can watch 4K on their TV etc.

Argument being that 4K is really only for cinemas at the moment.

Give it a few years to settle first. 

We all remember the hoopla over 3D from last year.


----------



## AG (Apr 16, 2012)

gibbygoo said:


> Ranga said:
> 
> 
> > Any thinking videographer/photographer would get 2 cameras for that price (unless of course they wanna show off their toys ) 1D-X for stills and an FS700 for video would come to around $15k with more video friendly features from the FS700. FS700 gets you high frame rates/ND filters/XLR inputs/SDI. The reason HDDSLRs caught on was because of the price point.
> ...



If your recording on camera audio via XLR then these types of cameras really aren't for you.


----------



## Jedifarce (Apr 16, 2012)

gene_can_sing said:


> and NO FLIP SCREEN? WTF? That's close to the number 1 request from video people!
> 
> The whole point of a DSLR is freedom from using an external monitor when you don't have to, and that's why a flip screen is priceless.



Hmm, pulling focus accurately using the back of the camera is difficult whether it's a flip screen or not. It's just too small. I'd rather use my external monitor.


----------



## DavidRiesenberg (Apr 16, 2012)

Shane Hurlbut seems to like it. And that's putting in mildly 



> When you harness 4K into the small footprint of a 1D, give it the processing power to record to little CF cards with no external recording devices needed, then deliver an image that crushes the F65, Epic, Alexa in one fell swoop. Now that is where the WOW factor comes in.



http://www.hurlbutvisuals.com/blog/2012/04/the-next-gen-in-digital-film-capture-canons-4k-1dc/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+HurlbutVisuals+%28Hurlbut+Visuals+Blog%3A+Hurlblog%29


----------



## gibbygoo (Apr 16, 2012)

AG said:


> gibbygoo said:
> 
> 
> > What about sports shooters?
> ...



Sorry, not sure what you're driving at there.
So, I shoot med-size jpgs for my local paper. My camera shoots 10fps. With the 1D C I can hit the record button for 24fps at 4k. That seems kind of awesome to me. Is there something that makes it impractical? I've got no problem downloading and scrubbing action clips from a game, selecting the critical moment and shit-canning the rest. What am I missing here?


----------



## Shawn_Lights (Apr 17, 2012)

Watched what Shane did with this Camera and was blown away. Again it seems Canon's advantages can't be put on the spec sheet (C300 images looks way better than what the specs indicate). The images is just beautiful out of this camera, also skin tones.

$15k for a 4K camera that records internally on little CF cards is amazing. It does has cons, but I think it's not priced too high at all.

The Blackmagic camera got me exited until I found out the sensor size and watched the test videos here: http://vimeopro.com/johnbrawleytests/blackmagic-cinema-camera

Test videos are so soft etc.


----------



## AG (Apr 17, 2012)

gibbygoo said:


> AG said:
> 
> 
> > gibbygoo said:
> ...



Still don't think you grasp how taking stills from video are different from shooting stills. Sensor size etc.

Either way, from what your saying you want a 1D-X not the 1D-C, You can get our high FPS and have basic 1080p video functions for "those moments".

Sure there are plenty of people that would love 24fps continual shooting for photography, but then does that make you a good photographer if you are basically shooting video and snipping the best bits? Or is the basis of a good photographer someone who when using your limitations and shooting 6FPS you still manage to capture that shot?

Photographers nowadays take their skills for granted and rely way too much on auto everything, high fps etc (/old man rant off)


----------



## gibbygoo (Apr 17, 2012)

Sure there are plenty of people that would love 24fps continual shooting for photography, but then does that make you a good photographer if you are basically shooting video and snipping the best bits?
[/quote]

The 1DX shoots half cinema frame rate right now at full raw. Is that OK with you? Will it not be OK when the 1DXII comes out in 2016 and shoots 30fps? Or is there something sacred about holding down a shutter button in burst mode vs. hitting a record button?

What makes me a great photographer is that I supply great images that sell. And "snipping the best bits" is exactly what you do whenever you shoot a continuous burst at whatever frame rate your imaging device can handle. In a practical sense, there is no difference between a record button and a shutter button.

Ya know what? I've answered my own questions about whether this would be good for sports, and the answer is hell yes, as long as the image quality standards are met for my clientel. End of story.


----------

