All Activity

R5II is still mainly a photography camera with its 45MP, ergonomics and eye-AF control EVF. It has great video specs but no fan, line skipped 4K60p.. I'd imagine the C50 would have limited stills, maybe e-shutter only, no EVF, cine OS.. not to cannibalise R5ii.

The C80 has internal ND and there's almost no way this one does, based on the size. C80 also has XLR, SDI, and about a bazillion buttons that this one doesn't. On paper, the R5C had a number of advantages over the C70, including better AF and 8K shooting. But it also lacked internal ND, XLR, etc. If I were Canon, I'd honestly be a lot more concerned about sales of the R5 II than the C80/C400 if this camera has most of the rumored specs. Especially if it has a DGO sensor, I'd gladly take that over 8K recording and 10-15 more megapixels for still photos.

You're right, 6K and open gate. But even without mentioning the crippled hammer, Canon has always been careful not to cannibalize its own products. Can a C50 be better than its sisters in the cinema line?

Me too, so no one should be calling that thing a box camera.

pretty sure its fixed.. a la FX3.

Oh sorry, I wasn't clear, I meant the side grip. The thing that looks very much part of the camera and very much not a box.

Multi aspect ratio delivery is increasingly common so open gate would be a god send not to mention it opens up anamorphic for higher end cine duties. Of course its detachable..

The rumor that was highlighted said it was "optional" which would absolutely imply detachable. 6K vs 4K, internal raw, and rumored DGO sensor would all be better on a spec sheet. But it's also true that we're in a time of decreasing returns. The FX3 is a great camera. It makes a good image, can work with very little light, has fantastic autofocus, and it's small/portable. Everything about it is absolutely enough for the vast majority of current productions. You could just as easily respond that you don't care about 6K, raw, or an extra stop or two of dynamic range and you'd be absolutely correct. On the other hand, Canon has lost a lot of their video production market share and they need something that they can point to when current users say they want something like an FX3, and ideally a little better than the FX3 so that their users still feel good buying Canon stuff.

Open Gate alone is a major game changer. 6K RAW / 32MP stills make it a serious upgrade for hybrid duties. Now stuff like triple-base ISO / DGO sensor & NDs would make it epic but I still doubt that'll happen. That said if you're happy with FX3 or locked into Sony, see this as more pressure on them to up the ante on FX3 II.

Still I don't see an edge on a 5 years old FX3. What I'm missing? Maybe RAW? FX3 files edit like butter

"Box-style design" does not align with what I am looking at. Either there are two different cameras, or some marketing genius decided to just call it what people want and hope no one notices. Edit: Or--and I'm really stretching here--that handle is detachable. Which would be really cool and I would take back all of my snide categorization criticisms.

Considering the rumored specs there is no way it was going to be R50V size! The XLR top handle aligns with the leaked info: Compact Box-Style Design: Aluminium alloy body construction, weather-sealed; active cooling fan for unlimited recording; weight ~650g (body only); RF mount with EF adapter support. TBA: Optional electronic viewfinder (EVF) attachment (5.76M-dot OLED); 3.2-inch vari-angle touchscreen LCD (2.1M-dot). Ports and Storage: Dual card slots (CFexpress Type B + SD UHS-II); full-size HDMI 2.1; USB-C 3.2; XLR audio inputs via optional top handle; Wi-Fi 6E, Bluetooth 5.3; Ethernet via adapter.

If that's the C50, it looks bigger than I thought. I was thinking it would be closer to the R50V in size.

So now we know there aren't XLR on the body itself, but we also know that Canon are releasing a first-party XLR hotshoe adapter (maybe it'll be backward-compatible with R5C/R5 II, etc).

Wonderfully shameless rip off of the FX3. Now let's just hope that the C50 is better than the upcoming FX3ii. https://www.youtube.com/shorts/780PWiZDFo8

Just saw this ebay find in his blog. That would be $8600 today. Canon R1 is now $6400 after tariffs. Even Trump gov is not greedy as 2013 Canon.

While all the rumour sites sites try and flex about who was first with the leak about the C50, this guy is sat there quietly with a TWELVE YEAR lead 😂

They don't even let you change the broken front glass of the 360 camera, then tell their army of YouTube influencers to say its not a big deal. With either mount, winning the heart and brain of professionals is very hard. I end this discussion here cause we're way off topic under a Canon thread.

Or maybe they are a progressive thinking company for whom the glass is half full and their thinking is; we are a major player in the action cam market, we are a major player in the niche high end camera market, we are THE player in the drone market, we have a pretty unique piece of filmmaking kit in the cinema market, is there are reason we cannot bring some of our momentum and perhaps innovation and enter the MILC market? It’s not a question therefore if they can, but if they should and that is up to them to determine but brands come and go and if anyone can make a strong case for entering into this specific part of the market, it’s probably DJI. But we’ll see… They either will or they won’t but if they do, my money is it will be with L Mount.

The difference being DJI don't want to be another player with 5% market share.

And yet, Leica, Panasonic, Sigma, Pentax, Fuji, OM System, and others seem to keep making and selling cameras despite the market dominance of Canon/Nikon/Sony. Guess you know more than the bosses at any of those companies as well. You should let them know about the futility of competing with the big 3, especially Fuji. They only had around 3 of the 5 top-selling cameras at Map Camera in 2024 and should probably quit before they embarrass themselves any further, as obviously nobody can compete with the big 3. DJi would clearly be better-served focusing on the enormous market segment that is... 360 cameras. 🤣

It would be funny while everybody talks about DJI camera rumors, Viltrox introduce a video camera with L mount. It makes sense from their perspective. They don't compete in still photography at first, to keep the Japanese owners of RF/E/Z unconcerned. But in cine/video, would target Panasonic and BMD.

In both cases the market was nominated by just one brand, and both market was a growing market. Full Frame ILC market is an oligopoly of three major brand, with almost no growth. Its even worse situation than when Samsung tried to enter APSC market.

If DJI enter the MILC market, I assume they will start at the consumer end rather than professional. There probably isn't a ton of overlap between consumer camera buyers, and pilots serious enough to own a drone with interchangeable lenses. My gut instinct is that basically none of their initial target market already own DL lenses. I also believe the consumer market has a short memory for system support. Canon dropped the EF-M mount one day, and within 1-2 years no one cared anymore. My gut is that an L mount camera will sell better. Either way, breaking into this market is difficult.

No, it would send the message that the lens mount that they invented for drones in 2017 is not suitable for a general-purpose MILC. And again, to release a new camera with 6 overpriced and mediocre first-party lenses available for it would be fucking stupid and almost nobody would buy it. They'd anger almost none of the existing customers who own those lenses which, again, includes me, a person who would never buy them for any system that I didn't expect to be hurtling through air at 60mph/100km/h. It's not at all clear what would be gained by swapping some mounts and rebranding Viltrox lenses as first-party lenses, especially if those lenses are already available for other existing mirrorless systems. The smart play if they want to have a fixed mount is L mount, a system which comes with great lenses already available from first-party makers like Leica, Panasonic, and Sigma - and a bunch of third-party lenses from all of the usual suspects and which they already support and sell. Other than "sends a message that they don't believe in your system," you have yet to present any sort of even remotely coherent argument for how DL mount would make any sense - or how not including DL mount would impact the sales of the drones or Ronin 4D which are the only cameras in existence that can currently use it. As to their interest in entering the market, it's not impossible to think that the success of the Ronin 4D and Pocket 3 have them considering adding something in-between the two. A few years ago, you might also have insisted that DJI would have no interest in entering the action camera market and competing with GoPro - but now they're 3 generations into that. Or just a few months ago, you might have insisted that they'd have no interest in competing with Insta360 with 360 capture, but yet, they did that too. They also wouldn't be "entering" the market. They are in the MILC market with the Hasselblad brand which they own. And yet, they also probably won't use the Hasselblad mount and that also won't send a message that they "don't believe in their own system."