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

[Tzedekh]

[quote name='TC' timestamp='1348190972' post='18779']
One last thing. Blackmagic have stated in interviews that after they announced their camera, they were contacted by other sensor manufacturers who wanted to sell sensors. You can bet the sales reps at those companies weren't just picking up the phone to Blackmagic. All you need now to produce a video camera is a sensor, processing chip, screen and lens mount. All pretty commoditised these days. Blackmagic will be the first of many companies that have never made a camera who enter this market.
[/quote]

In theory, this may be true, but in practice it hasn't proved so easy. Blackmagic Design already had a proven track record with much of the technology used in its camera, but even BMD's been experiencing issues, particularly in the supply chain. And as we've learned from the history of the Red Scarlet, timing is everything. The apparent excitement over the BMC has affirmed the viability of Red's original, nonmodular design, which, if Red had released it in 2009 as planned, would now be three years old. It would have undoubtedly gone through at least one update. And there would have been no reason for BMD to develop the BMC as currently specced. If BMD falls six or eight months behind, who knows, some other company may release a better-specced camera and preempt the BMC.

[jgharding]

Let's hope BMD do make a larger-sensor model, I see no reason for thm not to now they have most of the research out of the way for the first model, and it's a hit before it's even arrived! Don't expect it to come cheap though, the cinema cam is the first dose to get you hooked... ;)

[Tzedekh]

[quote name='richg101' timestamp='1348230253' post='18804']
I'm guessing the 1dc stores straight to card? in 4k? if this is the case, this will gain more market appeal than the red scarlet. even though so many people have this hankering for raw, most dont have the money to then spend multiple $$$$ on the additional hd's (more than £80 worth of ssd storage per 3 minute is it not? and more importantly, most are not undertaking work that even warrants raw.[/quote]

Probably more people are undertaking work that requires raw -- or at least better gradability than is possible with 8-bit H.264 -- than work that requires 4K.

[quote]having 4k straight to card and the dynamic range of the full frame sensor would be amazing, even it if is compressed in camera
[/quote]

Again, the codec is the weak link. A greater dynamic range would tend to make banding even more apparent.

[Grant Ellis]

Groan!
I smell a hack coming from a mile away.


Here's the budget filmmaker's question:
What would be the difference in a weekly rental cost between a 1DX and a 1DC?

Edit:
Looking at similar price differentials on rental sites, looks like they will just double it.
BLEH!

[Atlasman]

[quote name='mike_tee_vee' timestamp='1348171301' post='18751']
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.
[/quote]

I totally agree, it's what the market will bear that is the ultimate arbiter of price. Canon is still riding the wave of success and will continue with its policies until such time it sees its market share erode.

If you put the product in enough Steven Spielbergs, chances are it will trickle down the food chain.

[TJB]

[quote name='EOSHD' timestamp='1348176095' post='18758']
Business is business I suppose. But I think it could backfire. If you look at how the Hasselblad Lunar went down at Photokina, a NEX 7 with fancy trimmings is not worth 5k.

The 1D C actually IS worth the money. But what a shame it is not even better, with some more customisation and spec creep it would mean a better product for us and less margin for Canon. Canon chose margin. No peaking, no 25p, etc, etc.

They have done the same thing with the Canon C300 / C100 too. Notice that the hardware could be identical there too. And it is just the firmware that has changed to cripple the codec on the C100. By the way, HDMI on that is 4-2-2 and uncompressed so if you want a C300 for less money you know what to do.
[/quote]

The hardware is crippled as well. Note the 0.24" viewfinder. Useless!!!

[ScreensPro]

[quote name='Tzedekh' timestamp='1348232756' post='18809']
Again, the codec is the weak link. A greater dynamic range would tend to make banding even more apparent.
[/quote]

Let me guess, someone who hasn't actually edited C300 footage? The codec is really, really good. It holds up really well.

Stop looking at paper specs and download some footage. Yes, 4K might have more problems with that codec, but equally likely, it will be the same, or it might be better.

[Policar]

[quote name='ScreensPro' timestamp='1348256853' post='18838']
Let me guess, someone who hasn't actually edited C300 footage? The codec is really, really good. It holds up really well.

Stop looking at paper specs and download some footage. Yes, 4K might have more problems with that codec, but equally likely, it will be the same, or it might be better.
[/quote]

I don't get it either. The C300's footage grades great, so does Alexa footage, which squeezes 13+ stops of DR into a 10 bit 1080p image. Granted dSLR footage (certainly even ALL-I from the 5DIII) has these problems, but I just can't get them to show up with higher end cameras.

[agp26]

I wonder whether there is any possibility for magic lantern to do its' magic and incorporate 2.5 k? Can't really see the need for 4k at the moment, but 2.5k, clean hdmi out on Canon's best hdslr would be nice (looks at the moment as though d600 doesn't have great low-light shooting!)...

And yes 4k on the 1d-x would be a nice bonus....(and amazing low-light to boot, but expenive CF cards and no headphone jack...at least audio is solved with juiced link)...

Good scoop if true (no offense to Andrew, just wonder how clued-up Canon employee was), should be plastered all over the web under 'crippling'/fu"# over the consumer, but alas most vid forums have barely registered it....prbly too many better cams coming out at the same time...I'm still pissed (off!) as hell...as I need a good stills/vid combination, and can't take both, size is an issue...even hacking canon hdmi out on 1d-x would be amazing....

[RichST]

We've suspected all along that their cinema DSLR used the 1Dx sensor, if you look at the speed it can do at full frame and crop it just a bit you can get to the magic 24fps number. What I didn't think, though, was that the 1Dx had the extra horsepower to handle 24fps coming off the sensor and converting all that data to mjpeg in real time, that's a serious workload. I had assumed all that extra processing power needed to pull such a feat off was what made the camera expensive. Hmmm

[Simco123]

Is it possible to download the firmware of the 1DC and upload it onto a 1DX?

[Speediakal]

To everyone that's complaining of the price point, were you ever going to use a 4K camera? Do you even have the hardware to do so? The computer to process all that footage? The hard drive space to store all those files? Do you even have the 1D X? No?

They even said it's aimed at Hollywood. It's not aimed at the average consumer.

You aren't a customer of this product, why are you complaining? Canon doesn't care. If the film makers in Hollywood were complaining, they would care since that is their target customer base. But they're not since it is one of the cheaper cameras available to them that does 4K and is a good form factor for tight spots when needed.

The 1D C isn't part of the photography market, it's part of a whole other market, cinema/film. It's a strategic marketing strategy done by Canon to make exclusivity to high-budget film makers. If you're not making movies ,even 4K movies, then stop complaining.

[Zach]

[quote name='Speediakal' timestamp='1348640693' post='19059']
To everyone that's complaining of the price point, were you ever going to use a 4K camera? Do you even have the hardware to do so? The computer to process all that footage? The hard drive space to store all those files? Do you even have the 1D X? No?

They even said it's aimed at Hollywood. It's not aimed at the average consumer.

You aren't a customer of this product, why are you complaining? Canon doesn't care. If the film makers in Hollywood were complaining, they would care since that is their target customer base. But they're not since it is one of the cheaper cameras available to them that does 4K and is a good form factor for tight spots when needed.

The 1D C isn't part of the photography market, it's part of a whole other market, cinema/film. It's a strategic marketing strategy done by Canon to make exclusivity to high-budget film makers. If you're not making movies ,even 4K movies, then stop complaining.
[/quote]

You are completely missing the point. The point being that it is the same hardware of a camera half its price. At the price of the 1D X, that puts 4K INTO the price range of a lot of low budget folks hands. Its not insane to think that small studios or even independent film makers have machines to edit 4K these days

[Speediakal]

[quote name='Zach' timestamp='1348665016' post='19073']
You are completely missing the point. The point being that it is the same hardware of a camera half its price. At the price of the 1D X, that puts 4K INTO the price range of a lot of low budget folks hands. Its not insane to think that small studios or even independent film makers have machines to edit 4K these days
[/quote]

No, you're missing the point. This has nothing to do with what the hardware is. This has everything to do with who's buying it.

Low budget film makers aren't looking to use 4K. They don't need it. It's a hassle for them. A lot of low budget film makers shoot in 720p since it is easier, faster, and more convenient for them.

Did you pre-order the 1D C? Do plan on buying it? If not, then you are not customer, and this product doesn't apply to you.

If you want cheap 4K go get mad at Black Magic Design for not releasing the Cinema Camera with a 4K resolution.

[Zach]

[quote name='Speediakal' timestamp='1348683166' post='19081']
No, you're missing the point. This has nothing to do with what the hardware is. This has everything to do with who's buying it.

Low budget film makers aren't looking to use 4K. They don't need it. It's a hassle for them. A lot of low budget film makers shoot in 720p since it is easier, faster, and more convenient for them.

Did you pre-order the 1D C? Do plan on buying it? If not, then you are not customer, and this product doesn't apply to you.

If you want cheap 4K go get mad at Black Magic Design for not releasing the Cinema Camera with a 4K resolution.
[/quote]

What a ridiculous point of view! I can't buy it because its 15K! If it were the price of the 1DX with the exact same hardware, I very well could buy it!

[Speediakal]

[quote name='Zach' timestamp='1348696018' post='19087']
What a ridiculous point of view! I can't buy it because its 15K! If it were the price of the 1DX with the exact same hardware, I very well could buy it!
[/quote]

[i]Could.[/i]


Do you need a 4K camera? Are you in the business of making feature length films that are to be projected on large screens?

Since you don't have the money or aren't willing to spend $15k on a piece of video equipment, then you're not in the market for a 4K camera. Do you know how much cine lense cost? If you can afford one of those, you can afford a $15k camera.

The 1D C isn't marketed as a budget consumer camera. The Black Magic Camera is.

You [i]wan[/i]t 4K. You don't [i]need [/i]it. If you needed it, you would find a means to getting it.

But since you don't understand the business aspect of it, you can waste your breath. No one is caring that you can't get 4K for what you want it at.

[haarec]

[quote name='Speediakal' timestamp='1348683166' post='19081']
Low budget film makers aren't looking to use 4K. They don't need it. It's a hassle for them. A lot of low budget film makers shoot in 720p since it is easier, faster, and more convenient for them.
[/quote]

Yeah, even VHS is sufficient for a low budget film makers :D

Remember DV format? Hardly. So called Full HD is becoming a history as we see it. We need 4K in the same way as we needed Full HD 4 years ago when DV and DVD started to be a history. If anyone think about showing his works 4 years from now, wants and needs an affordable 4K camera today (affordable not necessarily mean Canon, of course). Yes, [i]needs[/i].

[Germy1979]

[quote name='Speediakal' timestamp='1348640693' post='19059']
To everyone that's complaining of the price point, were you ever going to use a 4K camera? Do you even have the hardware to do so? The computer to process all that footage? The hard drive space to store all those files? Do you even have the 1D X? No?

They even said it's aimed at Hollywood. It's not aimed at the average consumer.

You aren't a customer of this product, why are you complaining? Canon doesn't care. If the film makers in Hollywood were complaining, they would care since that is their target customer base. But they're not since it is one of the cheaper cameras available to them that does 4K and is a good form factor for tight spots when needed.

The 1D C isn't part of the photography market, it's part of a whole other market, cinema/film. It's a strategic marketing strategy done by Canon to make exclusivity to high-budget film makers. If you're not making movies ,even 4K movies, then stop complaining.
[/quote]

How much bigger is a 1DC than a Scarlet X? (This is a legitimate question, not being a smart ass:) I only ask being that at the Hollywood level of production, the highest of quality is generally the least taboo.... though the least amount of money spent is also. And there we have Act of Valor. (I swear if I find myself using this movie as an example one more time, I'll troll myself.) - 5D Mark ii. Which oddly, in my opinion, (And that means shit, but some may agree with this..) - still has the best looking image out of them all... (Canon's...though the 1-DX is pretty solid too.) It looks better than the 5D3, The C300 in all of its perfectly downscaled 1080p image glory, is too sharp and draws attention to itself. The C100, actually impressed me more, lol. The C500 looked artificial in a lot of shots too. The 1-DC, eh. Sharp. Sadly the 5D2 has moire/aliasing, no slow-mo, piss poor codec, lalalalalaaa. But it worked on screen and I hate to say, I love the way the 5D2 handles 8 bit color. not so much the highlights, though. lol

[Germy1979]

One more thing... I grew up learning the film look from the 80's before the defacto was high res, super saturated. Those classic scenes, campy as they may be... for instance, "Romancing the Stone". (yeah i just quoted that.) - the dance, then the anamorphic kiss. (Alan Silvestri helps a lot too.) The overstretched scene of the boat going down the road in New York as the credits roll.
Ghostbusters? The very last scene stretches further to close the curtain on the movie.. I love that stuff.

Those are examples.. But they're dated and nostalgic. Thus, why when I think of the film look, my mind subliminally goes to a cloudy day in NYC. Or a sunset that looks nothing like Michael Bay shot it... It sets a tone, but doesn't draw attention.

[Chrad]

[quote name='haarec' timestamp='1348857367' post='19149']
Remember DV format? Hardly. So called Full HD is becoming a history as we see it. We need 4K in the same way as we needed Full HD 4 years ago when DV and DVD started to be a history. If anyone think about showing his works 4 years from now, wants and needs an affordable 4K camera today (affordable not necessarily mean Canon, of course). Yes, [i]needs[/i].
[/quote]

See Skyfall while you can, folks. The producers will pull it from circulation before too long to save themselves embarrassment.