Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Why I think Canon have forgotten the indie filmmaker

39 posts in this topic

Posted

Cinema EOS

Canon entered the indie filmmaking market in 2009 with the 5D Mark II whether they intended to or not. The live view stills mode enabled a rudimentary video feature. This provided the basis for a whole new business, that ignores completely the indie filmmaker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Thoroughly well written Andrew. I can't wait to hear what Canon has to say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

For anyone that can't afford the BMCC, I suspect that the GH3 is going to swallow up this part of the market for next year or two.

 

With an image that is at least as good as the 5d3 and lots of other juicy bells-and-whistles -- at a price point that is similar to Canon's current Rebel line -- it'll be a no-brainer for most enthusiasts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Agree Ben.

 

But what a shame we've no 4K DSLR for $6k or even a full frame DSLR with proper 1080p resolution and no moire.

 

The 1D C since it is based so heavily on the 1D X also has some drawbacks like no HD-SDI or 25p 4K for European shooters.

 

When oh when will they get the blindingly obvious (to us) right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

For anyone that can't afford the BMCC, I suspect that the GH3 is going to swallow up this part of the market for next year or two.

 

With an image that is at least as good as the 5d3 and lots of other juicy bells-and-whistles -- at a price point that is similar to Canon's current Rebel line -- it'll be a no-brainer for most enthusiasts. 

 

that is if they don't need better, future proof lenses, better low light, wide angles and superior stills camera features.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

better, future proof lenses

 

Zeiss lenses or Canon lenses via adapter

 

 

better low light

 

More DOF when opening up the iris.

 

wide sngles

 

SLRMagic 12mm, Olympus 12mm

 

superior stills camera features

 

A slight inconvenience. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Zeiss lenses or Canon lenses via adapter

 

 

 

More DOF when opening up the iris.

 

 

SLRMagic 12mm, Olympus 12mm

 

 

A slight inconvenience. 

 

@1) yeah, but what to do when I want to shoot stills? Does this adapter support AF?

@2) yeah, but can it match 5dmk3 in low light?

@3) yeah, but what if i want wider than 24mm.

@4) yeah, but can I be "hybrid" pro with it? Will pros start using it @weddings etc???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Why do people buy Canons over REDs? Aren't they very similar in price? Serious question. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Meh.

 

Anyone can still buy the amazing and affordable Canon T series and MKIII and whatever else.

 

If you can't afford cine grade gear, then you can't afford it. Does Canon somehow owe all those who decided to shoot films on the MKII and 7D? 

 

I don't think so. Are they supposed to sell cine grade gear at a loss? I briefly considered the C500, and then realized the Scarlet-X was a far better deal and Red a far better camera company. 


I love the MKII and shoot commercial work on it every week, but I won't touch Canon's cine gear in part because I don't need it and because I can't afford it. I'd rather upgrade to the Dragon sensor Epic when the time comes for what? 20 grand? 

Sorry, but there's no point to a plastic C500 for almost $30K (including the external recording device) when the new Epic will record about (or almost) 20 stops of range at 5K with ALL that color depth - in camera, for about the same amount of dough or less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

@1) yeah, but what to do when I want to shoot stills? Does this adapter support AF?

People managed to shoot stills before AF; if AF matters buy a lens that can autofocus with the system.

@2) yeah, but can it match 5dmk3 in low light?

Fair enough. I apologize, my point should have been clearer; for someone manually focusing with a large aperture, the GH3 is much easier. Especially for stills.

@3) yeah, but what if i want wider than 24mm.

Panasonic 7-14. Not the best piece of glass but if there's no other solution, then that's it.

@4) yeah, but can I be "hybrid" pro with it? Will pros start using it @weddings etc???

If a professional needs AF then they will have bought the GH3 to be part of the m4/3 system. In fact, if a professional "buys into" the m4/3 system, then their m4/3 lenses will be just as future proof as lenses for other camera systems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Yeah I really don't understand why people still buy the Canon's in droves when there are better options at equivalent price points....or less. The 5D2 had a hell of a sexy image, without its shortcomings... They can have Scorcese or Spielberg or whoever else they want, put their name on a C-Something... and 9 times out of 10 those guys are still using Alexa's, Epics, Film, etc.. We'll only hear otherwise if they AREN'T using those. lol. Maybe Shane has a deal with Canon, maybe not... He didn't have to shoot an action movie on 5D2's though, and endure the pain in the ass that must have been..For the rolling shutter alone, lol... but he did, and a lot of us have 5D's. So I like the guys heart on the matter by bridging the gap between mainstream, and the rest of us in the trenches. Because it sure ain't Canon doing that anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Canon are pricey but one thing for sure they can stand a beating

and you can put fast cheap and light primes on a 5d

 

if only they could have put a swivel screen on them.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I just wrapped a shoot with a rented C100. I can't comment on the footage yet as I have not seen it (obviously the recording codec has its limitations), but I was surprised by how much I loved the design of the camera. It was intuitive and handled beautifully and had everything that I needed within easy access, much more than the FS100, AF100, probably the BlackMagic and certainly moreso than any ENG-type camera I have ever used. By the look of it, the C300 and the C500 are the same. Based on this experience alone, I believe that Canon is still in the game even though I can't afford to own one of these cameras for personal projects.

 

I believe that the "Democratization of Filmmaking" has already happened, and now we're just clamoring for slight IQ improvements. I've been caught up in it like so many others, but I'm trying to direct that energy towards shooting more stuff and building my skill set. The improvements will come sooner rather than later. But if I can't tell a story with a GH2 or a 5DIII, then those improvements will be lost on me when they get here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

@QuickHitRecord

 

Your second paragraph about the "Democratisation of Filmmaking" is one of the best comments I have read on this forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

like you said in the article, canon never really intended to get into the indie filmmaking business. nikon was a little late to the party, and if it wasn't for vitaly and the rest of the 'hacker' community, i doubt panasonic would have the success of the gh-series that they see now. these cameras all started out as stills cameras (some much better than others) that happened to do hd video; then people realized the potential. they were never designed as cinema cameras, let alone really 'serious' video cameras.

 

i think what is happening is the convergence of devices that are basically cannibalizing the companies' different product lines. they (canon) are obviously going to nerf the firmware and performance for the lower priced cameras so as not to threaten the high end models. why there are such a drastic jump in prices, i'm not sure; but there's obviously enough incentive (money) to continue to make video specific camcorders, video-capable dslr's and full on cinema-spec cameras. i think this issue happens with panasonic as well, though they claim their divisions are all independent; but i can't see a company purposely undercutting themselves like that.

 

i watched a top gear episode the other night where jeremy clarkson was reviewing the, new at the time, porsche cayman...good car, handles well, all that. but, if you look at it compared to the cheaper boxter and the more expensive 911, it fits perfectly in the middle; price, specs, performance and so on. i feel like canon is doing that with their product lines. camcorders are the boxters, cinema eos is the 911, and now the dslr's are the caymans. somewhere stuck in the middle between being better than average, but not quite the full potential.

 

i'm not sure what canon is thinking with the threat of legal action for hacking. didn't they learn anything from microsoft and the kinect? it is the homebrew/hacker people that are really driving the innovation and what is possible with these cameras. it's like honda threatening legal action for potentially modifying a civic. on a side note, why hasn't panasonic hired vitaly, driftwood and the like onto their development/firmware/something team? they obviously know how to get the most out of the cameras..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

@quickhitrecord: that is absolutely true: if you can't tell a story on a gh2, you cant tell it on any alexa. If you are an amazing story teller, you can get an audience with an iphone cam. Its not pixels, but emotions and true expression that gets people to involve with a movie.

 

Still i think Andrews point is valid aswell. I will stick with the GH2 for the time being. 90% of the people do not even have fully utilised the gh2, before they long for the next bigger thing. 

 

Of course if you have a highly developed skill set, then a technical sophisticated camera will help you to get more out of your visions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Yeah I really don't understand why people still buy the Canon's in droves when there are better options at equivalent price points....or less. 

 

Public perception, I to was in the Canon boat until I herd about the GH1, then the GH2.

 

I believe that the "Democratization of Filmmaking" has already happened, and now we're just clamoring for slight IQ improvements. I've been caught up in it like so many others, but I'm trying to direct that energy towards shooting more stuff and building my skill set. The improvements will come sooner rather than later. But if I can't tell a story with a GH2 or a 5DIII, then those improvements will be lost on me when they get here.

 

Yeah, I'm all good with whats possible already. More people need to focus on their craft then anything else, but that doesnt mean a little advancement isnt bad either ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'd ask why Panasonic, Sony and Nikon haven't even made a 4K DSLR, rather than bashing Canon for making it happen, but out pricing you.

 

At least Canon have one on the market. If resolution is that important to your film making, shouldn't they be applauded for getting the ball rolling? It is still the cheapest (by some way) 4K solution on the market.

 

As this article mentions Shane, you realise his film, "act of valor", shot on the 5DII, grossed millions and was well accepted by the film goers and critics? No one was sat moaning about it not being 4K.... They were just engrossed by the film.

 

It seems to me that feature lust and pricing might be being used as an excuse by people to not just go out and shoot a project.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It seems to me that feature lust and pricing might be being used as an excuse by people to not just go out and shoot a project.


yep:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

That's a totally different argument ScreensPro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The only way to get a 4K DSLR is to spend the money I was going to spend on actors and then I have no content. If I spend the money on content I have no camera and have to make do with shoddy 1080p on the 5D Mark III!

 

IMO you're better off shooting a film on the BMCC than on the 1DC. Over 99% of the films on the big screen today have all their post work done and are output at 2k resolution. I only know of a few films delivered in 4k (at a few selected theaters) in the past few years. 35mm film scans are mostly scanned at 2k. So really, if you have a movie to shoot, take the $6k you'd even spend on a 1DX if it had 4k and add it to your movie budget. Just go for it, seriously!

 

This whole thing could change over time with RED's new 4k distribution platform (and other new ones), but that's not what's gonna make or break your film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

That's a totally different argument ScreensPro

 

The point you raised is that Canon have priced you out of making your project... Forcing you to either choose talent in front of the camera, or features in your camera.

 

I put forward the counter argument that Canon have already created a budget indie camera that shot Shane's film and made him a good income and received praise from critics and viewers alike. In fact, they added a better codec, better low light, less aliasing and moire in their 5DIII upgrade.

 

Face it, Canon have provided cameras that any indie film maker could shoot a watchable film on, if they have the script and talent.... prices from $500 to $30,000.

 

I'm sure we'd all prefer more features.. resolution, dr etc.. and we'd all prefer things to be cheaper.... But the art of making an indie project succeed is to find ways around such problems and use your talents and script to drag people into the art.

 

Anyone sat on a script thinking they need to wait to shoot it in 4K, or with 14 stops DR, or must have raw, or must have x lens are just wasting their own time.

 

If you have a good script, buy a D800, a 5DIII, a 6D, a GH3... hell, grab a 2nd hand GH2 or 5DII.... Learn to light your scene and get pristine audio... and go do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

People managed to shoot stills before AF; if AF matters buy a lens that can autofocus with the system.

Fair enough. I apologize, my point should have been clearer; for someone manually focusing with a large aperture, the GH3 is much easier. Especially for stills.

Panasonic 7-14. Not the best piece of glass but if there's no other solution, then that's it.

If a professional needs AF then they will have bought the GH3 to be part of the m4/3 system. In fact, if a professional "buys into" the m4/3 system, then their m4/3 lenses will be just as future proof as lenses for other camera systems.

 

The only problem I have with GH3/GH2 is show me a pro photographer shooting professionally stills with it. GH2/GH3 is only addition, it's not a hybrid. It'll never beat canons/nikons system for stills with superior range of lenses and flexibility. It'll never beat FF sensor for stills. It's nice for extra resolution in video - if you need it, it loses in everything else.

 

Add the fact canon at some point in the future will adjusts to the competition. They will have to. They can easily crush GH3 if they want to. When it happens, you're ahead if u already know their system. It is very likely that they'll stay at the top of the photogpraphy industry with their cameras.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

The only problem I have with GH3/GH2 is show me a pro photographer shooting professionally stills with it. GH2/GH3 is only addition, it's not a hybrid. It'll never beat canons/nikons system for stills with superior range of lenses and flexibility. It'll never beat FF sensor for stills. It's nice for extra resolution in video - if you need it, it loses in everything else.

 

Add the fact canon at some point in the future will adjusts to the competition. They will have to. They can easily crush GH3 if they want to. When it happens, you're ahead if u already know their system. It is very likely that they'll stay at the top of the photogpraphy industry with their cameras.

 

 

Fair enough.  When it comes to photography, the FF Canons excel versus m4/3.  While it is a better tool, a photographer reduced to a mere GH1 or compact will still be able to produce an amazing image.  "Knowing a system" is only a little bit more then reading a manual and shooting specific tests.

 

Getting a usable shot is much easier from a Canon/Nikon camera then others, which is a much better argument for owning one.  They respond well to professional care on assignment, which in my opinion is why those two companies are the go-to for professionals.  I know I'd rather hike through rain with an aging 1Ds3 and some L zooms as compared to my Arax CM/MLU; as much as I perfer images from the Arax, it is not weather sealed etc etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites