Exclusive - Canon confirm 1D C 4K DSLR is same hardware as the 1D X

[Andrew Reid]

[url="http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/IMG_3569.jpg"][img]http://www.eoshd.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/IMG_3569.jpg[/img][/url]

I had a hands-on with the Canon 1D C today and was allowed to shoot some footage. I also had a improtum talk to a Canon Europe product manager who was very open and honest about Canon's approach with this camera, but what he said rather shocked me.

[PTRush]

Canon... Geez, what a load of crap-
Somehow, I'm really not that surprised. Not saying the software should be free, just seems a little self righteous on their part.

[AaronChicago]

I'm not familiar with the video on the 1D X. Does it look on par with the 1D C footage other than the 4k output. I guess what I mean is would shooting 1080p on the 1D X and 1D C look the same?

[Andrew Reid]

There might be a different AA filter design on the 1D C but other than that, same camera hardware, just tweaks and firmware added.

[cameraboy]

nothing new ...
there was a lot of proof that its a same camera with different firmware ...
Andrew now u can expect a lot of bashing ...

[Germy1979]

But of course... Lmao.

The downfall of it having 2 (non AF allocated) processors may be the pitfall Magic Lantern ran into in being unable to upgrade the 7D... Sucks too. The 1D-X is still typical Canon "retarded class" expensive, and it would be hard to find a donor to Alex & Co. probably regardless...

They all had their downfalls this year seems like. Canon really broke it off in the indie guys' wallets... Now they're kinda like Charlie Sheen, lol.

The GH3. Man. What exactly will they address in the firmware updates to justify the upgrade? Moire and Aliasing most likely & that's probably about it. No 4:2:2, same good ol 8 bits.

[Paul]

I'm no hardware engineer, but what's to stop the ML guys from downloading the firmware from the 1DC, making a few tweaks, and loading it onto the 1DX? Missing a headphone jack still, so kind of worthless as a documentary or run and gun camera, but for narrative or studio work it would be fine.

[andy lee]

Im sure Magic lantern will have a look to see if it is hackable!

[Andrew Reid]

[quote name='Paul' timestamp='1348166282' post='18730']
I'm no hardware engineer, but what's to stop the ML guys from downloading the firmware from the 1DC, making a few tweaks, and loading it onto the 1DX? Missing a headphone jack still, so kind of worthless as a documentary or run and gun camera, but for narrative or studio work it would be fine.
[/quote]

It is likely [i]very[/i] encrypted and protected by other methods too.

[AaronChicago]

That footage that Shane Hurlbut shot with the 1DC is unreal. Looks so good.

[cameraboy]

test
https://vimeo.com/48977944

[Simco123]

It does make you wonder what the 5DMkIII is capable of if Canon give it a Cinema C style firmware update.

[matt2491]

MAGIC LANTERN TEAM ENGAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

hehe :P

[Simco123]

I think by revealing that the much more expensive 1DC is in fact a cheaper 1Dx with a firmware upgrade it will no doubt upset potential 1DC customers. One thing customers don't like is being short changed by manufacturer. We are not talking about hardware or software limitation here. It could be that the 1DC is not selling very well and allowing leaks that a potential firmware upgrade of the 1Dx to a 1DC to get more people buying 1Dx.

[Xiong]

Wow, that kinda sucks.. I'd expect at least some different hardware feature :/

[HD Cam Team]

Great post Andrew.

It has been proven several times, all these DSLR cameras have a HUGE potential inside which is not fully delivered to customers due to a marketing and business matter. That is clear and known on every large product line manufacturing strategy.

The company has to "segmentate" their products to get more profit, even when they could deliver a MUCH better product with only a more featured software (firmware).

The point is: how much are these companies going to limit / "cripple" their products (cameras in this case)?

For instance, a $3,500 EOS 5D Mark III SHOULD be able to deliver more and better video features / performance. The same happens to the EOS 1D X.

NONE of them have a BASIC video feature like "Peaking", even when [b]Canon called the EOS 1D X as "The Film-maker's DSLR" in their official press release[/b]: [url="http://www.hdcamteam.com/2011/10/20/canon-eos-1d-x-needs-firmware-update/"]http://www.hdcamteam.com/2011/10/20/canon-eos-1d-x-needs-firmware-update/[/url]

There are cheaper cameras made by Sony and Panasonic with Peaking and better video resolution. Without a doubt Canon (and Nikon) [b]CAN deliver much better video features in their current DSLRs just via Firmware Update[/b].

How much they can do? That is up to their convenience from the business perspective, and the hardware limitation on each model. BUT the current hardware has huge potential which is not being exploited.

Magic Lantern has already clearly proven it. Lot of those features could be implemented in an official firmware because they work perfectly. There is no technical reason to deny it, only business reasons.

If the whole community complained and requested to Canon to improve the firmware of expensive cameras like 5D Mark 3 and 1D X [b]in video mode[/b], there would be more chances to get at least some of those very possible features and improvements.

It's a shame that [b]HACKING cameras[/b] is the only way to get some [b]basic features/improvements[/b] when manufacturers decide not to deliver them to customers, even when implementing those improvements wouldn't hurt their sales (in fact it could increase sales in many cases). "Peaking" in Canon & Nikon DSLRs is a very clear example, not to mention the hack to the Panasonic GH2.

[b]We all hope Product Managers of such big companies think more about this and change their minds in a more open and modern way.[/b]

Regards.

[sanveer]

I guess, its a strange take, on business sense, as well. Whereas, specialised cameras like the Canon 1DC would earn Canon about $6000, per camera (its JUST a random guess :P ), Cameras like the GH3 would get Panasonic about $300 (another random guess).The price difference is great, for huge profits, but, only in the short term. Because, if the GH3 were to sell in hundreds of thousands, and the 1DC were to only sell a few thousands, then, Panasonic, and all other manufacturers of cameras should consider, providing consumers, with similar technology.
I am assuming Advertisement budgets would be similar. For one, you pay huge amounts to top Directors and DoPs, and have a niche target audience, mostly penetrated, by word of mouth, For the other, you hire much cheaper actors (nut create expensive Advertisements), and a Huge Marketing Campaign. So, they're kindda drawn. Though, the mass consumption (read GH3), campaign, due to its reach, may be a little more expensive.
Also, much better video and much higher resolution, would also, unfortunately, need an Edit Setup (and Grading and Colouring), to match the kindda stuff, that comes out from one of these cameras. Most Laptops and Desktops would not be able to take the workload of a 4k resolution camera. As, a matter of fact, I feel, that if the GH3 were pushed to 210Mbps+ (or whatever the Perfect tranfer rate would be, without burning the processor), and allowed to push itself, as far as dynamic range, true colour and completely flat picture profile were concerned, most modern Indie Film Edit Set-ups, may not be able to handle it. So, its a very strange problem.
I hope, that, I am wrong. Though, I still do not believe, that, the price difference is justified. :angry:

[miseducation]

A hack wouldn't cannibalize 1D-C sales from the high end shops that would be purchasing them anyway. I wouldn't be surprised if porting the firmware ends up being a relatively easy hack. Then again, its Canon.

[richg101]

No owner users will exist for this item. but the hire firms will lap them up. and I for one would hire one over the C300. I like the dslr form factor and if asked to carry out super high end fashion photography I'd use this for both photos and video.

[mike_tee_vee]

There are no ethical implications to what a business choses to charge for its products. We live in a capitalist society where price action is governed by supply and demand. Canon's goal is to maximize profits. Demand will ultimately dictate price. As much as it sucks, Canon are under no moral obligation to provide cameras at a reasonable price for low budget filmmakers. Take a look at Apple. Margins on most of their products are significantly higher than the competition, yet the demand for them is through the roof.