Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Andrew Reid

Does Cinema EOS mark the end of high spec Canon DSLR video?

Recommended Posts

Doug! It's $12,000! Not an enthusiast market camera! Hello! Do you read me!? DOUG!?

if this forum is all about cheap products for enthusiasts, why is the 1DC mentioned and compared here so often?

if you compare the other brands' cameras with a 7D2 in terms of film making, the massive critics are of course much more justified than saying a 1DC is bad, which definitely delivers better image results than a GH4, samsung, nikon or every other below $10.000 camera.

 

if it's all about enthusiasts, why do they need the most professional features at any time in the earliest possible stage?  and which should be one brand always be ahead and be responsible to be a market leader at any time?  canon has all technologies in their portfolio, right now they just don't give it away in one product or cheap.  it sucks, but they will have to change that in 2015, or we don't buy any new products from them.

 

i just wonder what happens IF canon is bringing out the perfect camera in spring.  will there be an apology by EOSHD that says "sorry i've tricked you into another brand and system, buying new cameras, lenses and adapters, although your canon camera would still have perfectly done it for your needs in the recent couple of months"?

because: when in history did pro photographers or filmmakers did exchange their core tools every 6 months, just because new and better technologies came out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

Do you shoot a lot in low light Doug? You clearly read a lot in low light!! I clearly said "overall" that the GH4 and NX1 offer more features than the 1D C. They are better all-rounders, better optimised for shooting video. This isn't an opinion, it is a fact. I didn't design the cameras. Don't blame me for delivering to you a bunch of nice facts from the world out there.

 

As for "there's no extreme lowlight 4K camera alternative on the market" to the 1D C, I think you'll find the 4K output of the A7S is better in low light.

 

Again I didn't just invent that... it's a fact.

when the shogun AND its software are there, more comparison tests will show what the A7S really can do.  so far the 1DC is much better in 4K lowlight than most pro film cameras who are 2-8x as expensive.  i wonder why nobody says "hey its great that this special ability of the 1DC does ONLY cost 10.000 euros, and not much more".  in places where you should end at ISO 800 with an epic dragon or GH4, the 1DC can go to ISO 6400.  for this the money was absolutely worth it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 560a4aedcb80685284629074497fdc75

The C300 Mk II will surely have to be 4K. And judging by the ISO/noise improvement of the C100 MkII, the C300II may well be extremely good in that area too. I think the C300 MkII will answer a lot of these questions about Canon's direction with video (will it have 10-bit?). But it will come at a price. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The C100 Mk II will surely have to be 4K. And judging by the ISO/noise improvement of the C100 MkII, the C300II may well be extremely good in that area too. I think the C300 MkII will answer a lot of these questions about Canon's direction with video (will it have 10-bit?). But it will come at a price. 

 

But the C100 Mk II is not 4k. The Sony FS7 is. Problem solved, if you dare. ;) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 560a4aedcb80685284629074497fdc75

But the C100 Mk II is not 4k. The Sony FS7 is. Problem solved, if you dare. ;)

Argh, sorry, typo. I meant C300 MkII.

 

Corrected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi

Why are some of us fighting? Why so aggresive and defensive in addressing each other? These are cameras not your babies. If someone corrects you with a more sensible thought take it. Nothing shamful about it.

Anyway on the 1DC, I absolutely love this camera and wish I had one. Can't afford it. But I can afford a GH4, that's the attraction of it. But the 1DC is a better camera, don't forget it's also a full fledged 1DX/D4s type of camera, that alone has a market worth of 6-7 thousand dollars. Compared to the GH4 it just has a better image no doubt about it, much better colours, much less noise, higher dynamic range, Log gamma, un-sharpened sharp image, more robust broadcast approved codec with 800mbps and 4:2:2. 1.3x crop vs 2.3x, a true 1080p s35 mode, and of course 18mp full frame stills. And other than just pure IQ geek specs and no matter what anyone says, the image is just much better to me, a big difference, and there are the non IQ-related stuff that you find when comparing the 1Dx to the GH4, like 14fps stills with full mechanical shutter and AF and metering and OVF, and AF stills system, much higher build quality/weather resistence, Canon lenses quality and price, among a few others.

GH4 has a few advantages though, mainly usability and user assist ones, like peaking and zebras, and EVF and swivel screen, also higher bit depth on the HDMI output and a 96p mode vs 60p.

Having used both I think the 1Dc is a much better camera, especially with a Zucoto EVF to eliminate the EVF, peaking/zebras, articulating screen advantages. It is a better camera, but this entire comparison is not fair at all fir the GH4, it's a different league. It it 12-13K better? No. It's too much. If it was a 3-4K difference it would be my ultimate and most used camera. But it isn't, I can afford the GH4 but not the 1DC, so in the end I produce great 4K videos with GH4 compared to non with 1DC!

If Canon wants to win us over again then bring down the 1DC image and features to the DSLR line. Everyone else is doing it, why the hell not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 560a4aedcb80685284629074497fdc75

Sony make weapons components (used inthe recent Palestine offensive), one reason I like to avoid their cameras.. well that and their colours.

 

 

Ah ... and I thought I just disliked Sony colours. Well no Sony cameras are on my shopping list anyway, but now I feel particularly happy about it.

 

I think you'd have to stray pretty far to be off-topic on this thread. It's a warzone itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ebrahim Saadawi

Once you notice the A7s colours you can't not see it anymore. Something is horribly off no matter how hard you try to convince me otherwise. The colours are washed out no matter how hard you push saturation even to the breaking point, at that point they look like cartoon, thin, green, yellow and washed out. Hard to describe but I see it in every single A7s video shot out there. Don't see it neither in Canons, Nikons, Panasonics or anything else, even Samsung! That is the only single reason keeping me away from buying it, the colours, the images just don't look good to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But not because of cameras or sensors, so your point is moot.

 

The point is no one can look back over the last five years of financial statements and find a loss on Canon's income statement... the same cannot be said for the next 4-5 competitors.  Canon is rock solid.  I am not necessarily happy with their efforts in the consumer range as far as DSLR video but I have to admit they are accomplishing things that other companies are not... like avoiding junk bond status (ie Sony).  Sony's camera division may be doing better than the rest of the company but when it has to access the credit markets it will have to deal with that junk status.  I don't think Sony's camera division is in the same position as Panasonic's.  I was just highlighting that when it comes to finances they certainly don't have the upper hand on Canon.

 

There will be a shakeout in this industry.  You brought up the cell phone industry.  Apple and Samsung are number one and two based on a wide range of metrics.  Can anyone on this forum name number 3 and 4?  The consumer camera industry is maturing.  There simply is not enough space for 6+ major players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

because: when in history did pro photographers or filmmakers did exchange their core tools every 6 months, just because new and better technologies came out?

 
Well you see it's interesting because if you're talking real history there wasn't a technology change every 6 months. These days, film professionals don't invest into cameras unless they happen to be flush with money and can throw away that kind of money on a camera or if they can be sure they'll have enough work to pay it off within the next 12 months. After that, you expect the technology to change and move on, because that's the current camera climate.
 
You sound like a guy who is really jaded because he spent way too much money on a camera that is out-dated and being out-specced by cheaper cameras.
 
Do you know what people do invest in? Lenses. Professionals who actually work day to day in this industry don't invest in camera bodies, unless they're really high-end and they can make money off rentals like Alexa, or they're justifiable because they have the work over the following 12 months to pay it off on top of paying their wage.
 
 

i wonder why nobody says "hey its great that this special ability of the 1DC does ONLY cost 10.000 euros, and not much more".  in places where you should end at ISO 800 with an epic dragon or GH4, the 1DC can go to ISO 6400.  for this the money was absolutely worth it.

Because if the only thing it offers over any other camera is the ability to go to ISO6400 @ 4k, it's not a really good investment. You forget that most professionals use lights. Most professionals don't need to go to ISO6400 ever. There hasn't ever been a time when I've been shooting with Alexa and thought 'oh man, I really wish I could push this to 6400 ISO'. I just light the scene. I often shoot night scenes and stop down to ~T4.0. At 800 ISO. I like the depth. It's called lighting. It's more important to your overall image than the camera body that's capturing the lighting.
 
Now, if you're talking events or docos - sure. But a DSLR-type camera is not going to be my first choice for those anyway because it's not ergonomically suited to run 'n' gun video shooting. However, sometimes you don't have teh budget for much more than a DSLR.
 

The C300 Mk II will surely have to be 4K. And judging by the ISO/noise improvement of the C100 MkII, the C300II may well be extremely good in that area too. I think the C300 MkII will answer a lot of these questions about Canon's direction with video (will it have 10-bit?). But it will come at a price.

 
My feeling is that either the C500 and C300 will merge into one camera whose price sits in the middle of the two now. Or, the C300 mkII will get 2k 8-bit internal, 4k 10-bit via recorder. And the C500 mkII will get internal 8-bit 4k recording.
 
 

Once you notice the A7s colours you can't not see it anymore. Something is horribly off no matter how hard you try to convince me otherwise. The colours are washed out no matter how hard you push saturation even to the breaking point, at that point they look like cartoon, thin, green, yellow and washed out. Hard to describe but I see it in every single A7s video shot out there. Don't see it neither in Canons, Nikons, Panasonics or anything else, even Samsung! That is the only single reason keeping me away from buying it, the colours, the images just don't look good to me.

 
I've used Sony cameras a fair bit recently. I really like the F5, and the image out of the F3 is pretty impressive too. The image out of the A7s is very very similar to the image out of the F3.
In my personal opinion - the Sony image is different, not worse. The Sony image is very different to Canon, Nikon, Red, Alexa... But it's not bad.
I'm not sure what videos you've seen - I've seen some awfully graded A7s stuff around the internet, and some of them are from people who are trying to suggest ways to grade the footage! However, the stuff I've shot I've been pretty happy with.
 
I think the biggest issue is that most people who are buying into this camera don't have much idea how to work with S-log. So you end up with footage that's underexposed and therefore needs to be pushed a lot more introducing a lot more noise. And you end up with footage that's not graded very well as the majority of the market the A7s is aimed at have no clue how to grade it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest 560a4aedcb80685284629074497fdc75

I try not to go on about it too much because I got so much negativity whenever I said it, but quite honestly I can't believe SO MANY people are content with the image from the A7S. The colours are really weird and thin. Like you Ebrahim I haven't seen anything that has looked more than "OK" in colour terms from an A7S, and even then there have just been a few of those.

 

You hear people say "s-log is tricky to grade" or "don't shoot s-log", but I'm yet to see somebody get nice colours from anything shot with that camera. I accept that colour is arguably a very subjective thing, and I'm more than happy to be the only person in the world that doesn't like the A7S's image, but I am amazed that more people don't find this a really big problem. It's honestly like 'The Emperor's New Clothes' to me.

 

Colour is #1 on my list of priorities though - after seeing that F35 footage here recently I even went looking on ebay for a cheap standard definition 1/3" camcorder with CCD sensor(s)!!! Didn't find anything that convinced me though. I should probably just buy a Super-8 camera ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The future of Photography and video is with Canon and Sony I believe.

How so? Canon is not creating any "future" cameras, they sell lots and they are a safe name etc...(thats a given)

 

But no-one thats looking to the "future" of video...looks at Canon, all the enthusiasts, all the blogs (not just Andrew) the reviewers on Youtube...etc...all look to Sony,

Panansonic and possibly Samsung...and even Nikkon...but Canon are more and more being regarded as Dinasaurs.

 

Its not Andrews fault, its everywhere...when was the last time in the last year or two that a blogger said wow this new DSLR from Canon blows away (no pun intended)

the competition with this amazing feature etc..?

It does not happen...on the Contrary many bloggers, many reviewers Dugdale, Celeb Pike and loads of others have moved to Panasonic or Sony..and they let others know why...you cant stop this, eventually the masses slowly follow.

The importer that brings Canon and Panasonic, Nikkon into Australia told me when I bought my GH4 that he could not get enough GH4's and it was frustrating, he also told me that although Canon sales are good, they are definitely not what they used to be.

We can argue this till the cows come home, but the reality is things are changing and because of the internet, things are changing quickly.

Remember there were no 4K DSLR type cams just over a year ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think saying Canon is losing customers in the video enthusiast market is reasonable.  I don't think it is reasonable to extrapolate that it is going to cost them dearly financially in the long run.  I wish it would cost them... but so far it hasn't.

I think this is a reasonable conclusion, but current data seems to show that the lack of catering to enthusiatsts is begining to cost Canon in overall profits, time will tell tho, the next few years will be interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I think Andrew is right, many here say Canon does not need to take risks its sales are stable and profitable

Whereas others like Sony, Panansonic etc..are not. Well current data appears to contradict that claim

 

This is from 2013 too, now mirrorless markets are eating into Canons profits as well.

 

 

NOTHING is guaranteed

 

Canon

As Canon and Nintendo posted results Wednesday, the two companies felt the impact of smartphones in different ways.

For Canon, digital-camera shipments are shrinking rapidly as smartphones eat into demand for compact point-and-shoot models,

while Nintendo's newest videogame systems are struggling to gain momentum in a world of free-to-play games surging on smartphones.

 

Meanwhile, Canon said it posted a 34% decline in quarterly net profit even though sales and earnings benefited from the weak yen.

Canon said sales at its imaging-system business, 70% of which comprises camera sales, slipped 1.8% in the first quarter in yen terms,

although they sank 14% once the impact of the yen's depreciation is stripped out.

In addition, the operating-profit margin at the business fell to 9.6% in the first quarter from 15% a year earlier.

 

Panasonic

Japanese consumer electronics giant Panasonic has reported its first full-year profit for three years, with the weaker yen helping to boost

sales.

The maker of the Lumix camera posted profits of 120.4bn yen ($1.2bn; £710m) for the year to March

 

Note this was before sales of the GH4 really began to kick in, not to mention the LX100 etc...

 

So data seems to show that although over the longer term Canon has been the most profitable.

However over the last year we get a very different story Panasonic is making profits and Canons business is shrinking.

 

So it would be natural to conclude that Panasonics risk taking in delivering new technologies is paying off.

Whereas Canons no risk policy is not paying off. Andrew is right on that score, and data backs it up.

So do countless Internet opinions, blogs, Youtube reviews and a ton of other stuff.

Personally I couldnt give a rats ass who is the best tho.

But I would not pay $10,000 of dollars for a Canon 1DC in 4K when I can get a GH4 with a good lens for a quarter of the price and no-one

(unless they are a total pixel peeper) would see the difference on a 1080P screen.

I simply like seeing better technologies delivered at a good price to consumers and right now Panasonic, Sony and Samsung are doing that...Canon is not.

 

Article here...and there are many more elsewhere

 

 

http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324474004578442290959547764

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once you notice the A7s colours you can't not see it anymore. Something is horribly off no matter how hard you try to convince me otherwise. The colours are washed out no matter how hard you push saturation even to the breaking point, at that point they look like cartoon, thin, green, yellow and washed out. Hard to describe but I see it in every single A7s video shot out there. Don't see it neither in Canons, Nikons, Panasonics or anything else, even Samsung! That is the only single reason keeping me away from buying it, the colours, the images just don't look good to me.

Jeez I totally agree...I thought something must be wrong with my eyes.

But I just cant feel comfortable with it, its a pity..I would love to love it, but I dunno it just doesnt float my boat,

I prefer the Canon, Panasonic, Samsung look ...any day.

Oh well art is subjective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is no one can look back over the last five years of financial statements and find a loss on Canon's income statement..

Thats not totally true...maybe not a loss yet, but a rapid decline early in 2014 ...see the post above, as far as competitors not posting a profit...see the above also.

Its also reasonable to predict (based on early 2014 data, that Canons later sales will be eaten into even more...with Mirorless, Increasing Consumer 4K, and smaretphones.

Canons business model is not rock solid, it has been, but times are changing quickly...most newer data confirms this, its good to check current data..before you post statements like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once you notice the A7s colours you can't not see it anymore. Something is horribly off no matter how hard you try to convince me otherwise. The colours are washed out no matter how hard you push saturation even to the breaking point, at that point they look like cartoon, thin, green, yellow and washed out. Hard to describe but I see it in every single A7s video shot out there. Don't see it neither in Canons, Nikons, Panasonics or anything else, even Samsung! That is the only single reason keeping me away from buying it, the colours, the images just don't look good to me.

 

Since we're all tangential at this point, anyone watch season 4 of "The Killing"?  They switched to a different camera; was wondering if it's a Sony?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so far the 1DC is much better in 4K lowlight than most pro film cameras who are 2-8x as expensive.  i wonder why nobody says "hey its great that this special ability of the 1DC does ONLY cost 10.000 euros, and not much more".  in places where you should end at ISO 800 with an epic dragon or GH4, the 1DC can go to ISO 6400.  for this the money was absolutely worth it. 

 

The A7S can go to 12,800 cleanly and it costs $2k. It's cleaner in low light at ISO 12,800 than the 1D C is at 6400 at "only 10,000 euros". Bargain I say, that 1D C. Bargain!

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...