Jump to content

Multiple RF Cinema Cameras & XC20 coming from Canon


ntblowz
 Share

Recommended Posts

Definitely keen on th R200 which uses c200 sensor, looks like the perfect c100mkii replacement at same price as A7SIII

R300 also looking very good with same sensor as C300mkiii DGO sensor at cheaper price than current C200

 

XC20 gonna have constant 2.8 10x zoom and internal raw

 

https://www.canonrumors.com/multiple-cameras-coming-to-the-new-cinema-eos-r-lineup-along-with-a-new-xc-series-camera-cr2/

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ntblowz said:

Definitely keen on th R200 which uses c200 sensor, looks like the perfect c100mkii replacement at same price as A7SIII

R300 also looking very good with same sensor as C300mkiii DGO sensor at cheaper price than current C200

 

XC20 gonna have constant 2.8 10x zoom and internal raw

 

https://www.canonrumors.com/multiple-cameras-coming-to-the-new-cinema-eos-r-lineup-along-with-a-new-xc-series-camera-cr2/

R200 with 420 8-bit?, I will get an R6 with a Ninja 5 instead any day of the week, and a portable fridge of course, really bad for a cinema camera, R300 looks better, if they have DPAF, most probably they will, but the price is too high, no RAW is a bummer, but if they added in a later date could be OK, it is even more expensive than a Komodo, anyway, could be the option to go after R5 disaster.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

R300 looks great! The C300III sensor is really amazing. RF mount also opens the possibility to use a speedbooster to get full frame on a ~$6000 small body with internal ND, pro codecs and probably external RAW, way better than the C300III for some people who doesn't needs all the features from the C line.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I might be interested in the XC20 to replace my Sony AX100 camcorder.

Tempted by the 10 or 15 over the last few years but neither really had enough to warrant the expense and there hasn’t been anything else on the market either with ‘enough’.

I only use it for one purpose and that is static full ceremony and speeches at weddings, but would welcome something sub 1500)/£/euros that did better low light.

Also for purely personal reasons, I’d rather being using something that looks a bit more pro than a camcorder. Just because.

So will be interested to see what any XC20 might be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shame.

These updated rumors sound a lot less tempting than the earlier one.

Looks like the R200 at $3,499.00 will be severely handicapped and the R300 will the better one, but at $6,299.00 USD it is a bit too steep in price for something that essentially just matches the specs of the A7sIII but isn't Full Frame or has IBIS and has an RF mount and internal NDs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Mandalorian said:

Shame.

These updated rumors sound a lot less tempting than the earlier one.

Looks like the R200 at $3,499.00 will be severely handicapped and the R300 will the better one, but at $6,299.00 USD it is a bit too steep in price for something that essentially just matches the specs of the A7sIII but isn't Full Frame or has IBIS and has an RF mount and internal NDs.

Some of these comments are just hard to fathom. These comparison on spec sheet vs spec sheet are getting a little out of control. The C300 absolutely destroys the A7s3. One is a cinema camera, the other is a small mirrorless. The R300 at $6,299 Is a steal. I’m assuming people here have never used a canon cinema camera, because visually and ergonomically, it’s night and day. Add XLR, ND filter, better color, better actual DR (not spec sheet DR), a cooling fan, etc. On top of that the new sensor in the c300 is absolutely fantastic. Not everything can be compared in a spec sheet. There are phones that do 4K 60 and they still look like a phone shot the footage. An A7s3 is great for what it is, but it is not a cinema camera 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, crevice said:

Some of these comments are just hard to fathom. These comparison on spec sheet vs spec sheet are getting a little out of control. The C300 absolutely destroys the A7s3. One is a cinema camera, the other is a small mirrorless. The R300 at $6,299 Is a steal. I’m assuming people here have never used a canon cinema camera, because visually and ergonomically, it’s night and day. Add XLR, ND filter, better color, better actual DR (not spec sheet DR), a cooling fan, etc. On top of that the new sensor in the c300 is absolutely fantastic. Not everything can be compared in a spec sheet. There are phones that do 4K 60 and they still look like a phone shot the footage. An A7s3 is great for what it is, but it is not a cinema camera 

I guess it depends on whether this rumored R300 is just a box or if it comes with everything the C300 has as well (except RAW): an adjustable touch monitor, a handle, full size XLRs, HDMI/SDI ports, internal NDs, plenty of customizeable buttons, etc.

If it is just a box, then at $6,299.00 it is now competing with the RED Komodo (which is around $6,000.00 for the black colored version).

I guess we will get more details as time goes on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Mandalorian said:

I guess it depends on whether this rumored R300 is just a box or if it comes with everything the C300 has as well (except RAW): an adjustable touch monitor, a handle, full size XLRs, HDMI/SDI ports, internal NDs, plenty of customizeable buttons, etc.

If it is just a box, then at $6,299.00 it is now competing with the RED Komodo (which is around $6,000.00 for the black colored version).

I guess we will get more details as time goes on.

That point is valid and I also want to clarify my other point. I am in no way bashing the A7S, I have owned every single Alpha series camera minus the A9. They are great, but they are great for what they are. I don't think you could ever replace a true cinema camera that has internal ND, a fan, great pre-amps, XLR, etc. That is what you need for high end shoots and no mirrorless camera can replace that. On top of that, the new C300 sensor is REALLY good and the images out of it are on another level compared to mirrorless cameras. But, like you said, it will be interesting what else it comes with. Though to be fair, the Komodo doesn't really come with many accessories either - but it does have the advantage of having raw internal, a top monitor and great wireless monitoring to a phone. Though canon also has another big advantage with their dual pixel autofocus. I do think canon needs to include internal RAW for BOTH of these new rumored cameras. I will take that one step further, every single cinema camera from here on out needs to offer RAW video. There is no excuse not to have RAW video anymore in cameras at this price range, just like every stills camera shoots RAW photos now days - every mid to high end video camera needs to shoot RAW video. The advantages are just too great for it not to be standard. If it has to be uncompressed, then let it be uncompressed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/8/2020 at 12:43 PM, hijodeibn said:

R200 with 420 8-bit?, I will get an R6 with a Ninja 5 instead any day of the week, and a portable fridge of course, really bad for a cinema camera

This is what happens if you just read off a specs sheet. The 8bit of the c200 is very, very good and will give you a great image.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, crevice said:

Some of these comments are just hard to fathom. These comparison on spec sheet vs spec sheet are getting a little out of control. The C300 absolutely destroys the A7s3. One is a cinema camera, the other is a small mirrorless. The R300 at $6,299 Is a steal. I’m assuming people here have never used a canon cinema camera, because visually and ergonomically, it’s night and day. Add XLR, ND filter, better color, better actual DR (not spec sheet DR), a cooling fan, etc. On top of that the new sensor in the c300 is absolutely fantastic. Not everything can be compared in a spec sheet. There are phones that do 4K 60 and they still look like a phone shot the footage. An A7s3 is great for what it is, but it is not a cinema camera 

 

Lets not forget that a lot of posters act like they are producing Hollywood blockbusters. I realized long ago my avg viewer will view my content at 480P on a cell phone. I think in this day and age specs just don't matter. I care more about things like reliability, ecosystem, and ergonomics than video specs.

 

1 hour ago, Yurolov said:

This is what happens if you just read off a specs sheet. The 8bit of the c200 is very, very good and will give you a great image.  

You beat me to it. I almost didn't get the C200 because of all of the bad press over no 10bit recording options. But after watching a few videos and truly not being able to tell the difference I got the C200 anyway. What Canon did with the 4:2:0 8bit that comes out of that camera is nothing short of incredible. They truly do hold back some secret sauce that is nowhere to be found in their DSLRs. I have yet to shoot raw with the C200 or feel the need to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/8/2020 at 3:45 PM, noone said:

HMM does that mean they are going to have to abandon the M mount or are they going to have to develop some native crop sensor lenses for both R and M mounts?

From the moment RF Mount has announced (if not even earlier!) then it was crystal clear that EOS-M is a doomed mount that Canon will "eventually" (we don't know exactly when, but the writing is clearly there on the wall) drop support for. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

in 2020 I want 10bit codec. I am not going to have this discussion again, but if you do not need "broadcast ready codecs", then everything if fine, skip this comment.

I am not going to spend 8000 euros, or more for another personal camera - because that is how 6500$ translates to Europe - and then I have to rent for broadcasted, or better projects, thank you very much, I stay with GH5 and Pocket cameras for lesser projects and rent when I want to go higher.

If you are a youtuber, then even your 4 years old phone has enough specs and there are multiple solutions under 500$ to better those specs.

I rarely need raw, or any raw, but 8bit was alright 10 years ago..

I am still waiting for a C100mkII replacement, this is one of the most populat Canon cameras ever, where is the next one? R200 certainly is not.

Sony and Panasonic offer XLR thingies that give their video centric mirrorless exactly the same sound options as a video camera (Sony records 4ch and can take the Sony wireless natively) and the only difference is the internal ND, if you get IBIS, better or similar sensor, much better codecs, smaller price tag and you miss only the internal ND, then most people will go with the better everything and they will stick one of the many vND we all have. As simple as that, there is a limit when a video camera is better than a mirrorless and in Europe you will have probably to go above 8000euros for a Canon one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, IronFilm said:

From the moment RF Mount has announced (if not even earlier!) then it was crystal clear that EOS-M is a doomed mount that Canon will "eventually" (we don't know exactly when, but the writing is clearly there on the wall) drop support for. 

Why would it be doomed? The lens lineup is pretty comprehensive for the intended market and its just a mirrorless version of their APSc dslr lineup. There's no need for 2.8 zooms and such, and by all accounts the M line sells really well. More new bodies are in the rumor mill. The costs to develop are minimal compared to something like the R5 which doesn't have multiple models to spread costs over and get an additional return from greater sales. As of now there's no 5d5/6d3 to spread out costs of cameras like the R5/R6 and no entry level stuff in the RF mount, and nothing that would fill that void in the announced lenses. The M mount has its place. Hindsight is 20/20, the RF mount should have been their one and only mirrorless mount from the beginning, but they can't go back and change that.

Will we see more lenses? Not likely, but I'm sure we'll see new bodies until they don't sell in numbers to justify their existence. I'd be willing to bet in 5 years we're still getting new M bodies. It really doesn't make any sense to kill M bodies until they aren't profitable, but at that would likely mean the entry level APSc dslr's would also be dead.

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The R300 looks amazing and, with those specs, is a great buy, especially if Canon also puts out a dedicated speedbooster. All you lose is raw internal (and even that may be included at a later date) from the C300 III? 

The R200 on the other hand is CLOSE, but has to have a 10-bit codec at least up to 30p to be useful. Too many people ask for 10-bit now to spend any true money on an 8-bit camera in 2020. All the new mid-tier and higher-end mirrorless cameras have 10-bit internal now, so it would seem a bit crazy to have a $3500 VIDEO camera that doesn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/7/2020 at 10:49 PM, MrSMW said:

I only use it for one purpose and that is static full ceremony and speeches at weddings, but would welcome something sub 1500)/£/euros that did better low light.

Also for purely personal reasons, I’d rather being using something that looks a bit more pro than a camcorder. Just because.

I don't know how much a used Panasonic S1 goes for in your neck of the woods, but it would be ideal for that kind of a situation. (I am assuming you wouldn't need AF-C in those situations but I could be wrong.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Yurolov said:

This is what happens if you just read off a specs sheet. The 8bit of the c200 is very, very good and will give you a great image.  

in post I still want 422, I agree the image from canon is great, but you have to expose properly and make no mistakes, if you have a better codec you will be able to recover from some mistakes during the shooting process, I have been working with Canon C100 for a few years and the ninja star is already part of the hardware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, hijodeibn said:

in post I still want 422, I agree the image from canon is great, but you have to expose properly and make no mistakes, if you have a better codec you will be able to recover from some mistakes during the shooting process, I have been working with Canon C100 for a few years and the ninja star is already part of the hardware.

Of course 422 is preferred. But so long as you can use clog2 with the internal codec there is no issue with the dynamic range. 

The benefit of the 8 bit is that it is so much easier on the computer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

Why would it be doomed? The lens lineup is pretty comprehensive for the intended market and its just a mirrorless version of their APSc dslr lineup. There's no need for 2.8 zooms and such

It is doomed because Canon will not forever keep on putting equal efforts into both M & RF Mounts, as it is not in their best interests to do that.  Thus eventually EOS-M will die out. 

But even before that happens, the EOS-M series is still a dead end to buy into. 

Like you said, where are the f2.8 zooms to buy into when you upgrade your kit lens? Where are the higher end bodies to upgrade to as you grow as a filmmaker??

At the moment if you're starting out with say Sony/Nikon/Panasonic you could buy a really cheap a6300/Z50/G7 then in the future upgrade to the likes of an a7Rmk4/a7Smk3/Z6/Z7/GH5/G9/P4K/E2-M4/etc along with having complete access (to each of their respective) full range of professional lenses. 

13 hours ago, Trek of Joy said:

Hindsight is 20/20, the RF mount should have been their one and only mirrorless mount from the beginning

Exactly! And eventually that is what will happen, RF will their "one and only mirrorless mount".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...