FilmMan Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 It seems Canon now has adjusted their pricing for their 4k dslr. The 1DC is priced at [size=5][b]$11,999.[/b][/size] Links: [url="http://shop.texasmediasystems.com/Canon-EOS-1D-C-Cinema-EOS-Camera-Body--6994B002_p_5046.html"]http://shop.texasmediasystems.com/Canon-EOS-1D-C-Cinema-EOS-Camera-Body--6994B002_p_5046.html[/url] [url="http://www.abelcine.com/store/Canon-EOS-1D-C-Camera/"]http://www.abelcine.com/store/Canon-EOS-1D-C-Camera/[/url] Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzNimbus Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Facepalm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted November 21, 2012 Administrators Share Posted November 21, 2012 Prices of 4K cameras will drop dramatically in the coming years. Canon better make the most of it! It really angers me that after democratising filmmaking with DSLRs, they stopped for 3 years before introducing this ridiculous upgrade path - $3000 5D Mark III ---> $6000 1D X ---> $12,000 1D C Which is not an upgrade path for us at all. Tired of the Rebels and 5D Mk II as a result my upgrade path went like this... Canon in the bin ---> $700 GH2 ----> $4000 FS100 ---> $3000 Blackmagic Cinema Camera They have completely forgotten about the enthusiast and consumer creative video market, indie filmmakers, convergence, owner-operators, the lot of 'em. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FilmMan Posted November 21, 2012 Author Share Posted November 21, 2012 Andrew, good post. If you noticed the big camera manufacturers, they seem to keep their specs in line with the other guy. Canon could be the leader but is keeping with the status quo so to speak. The new "camera" competition will put pressure. Also, hats off for Red for aggressively lowering their pricing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted November 21, 2012 Administrators Share Posted November 21, 2012 The painful thing is the 1D C is a great artistic tool. A dream camera for me. Canon seem to be able to charge what they like and pros will not see it as a problem. Most of them rent any way. Now let's talk about the non-pro market. This is the one I am most interested in because of the philosophy that being a cinematographer should be like being a musician. You pick up the instrument and if you are talented you go far. A shame none of this talent will be picking up a 1D C. A shame Canon continue to look at professional niche markets with huge margins rather than changing the world. Changing the world seemed to work well for Apple's bank balance. I guess Canon just lack the imagination. Their profits are down. All I can say is... Good luck from now on. nahua 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Germy1979 Posted November 21, 2012 Share Posted November 21, 2012 Meh, I certainly wouldn't turn one down if they offered it too me. It's a killer tool for just about anything, but if they feel that it's worth $13,000 friggin dollars... Let 'em do it. By next year, the competition will be undeniably more cost effective, and more attainable than a 1DC. A cinema camera in a small "dslr" form factor already came out this year at a fraction of that cost, so the idea is not so fresh.. And we can talk about the BMC all day in its monopolization of that market, but the truth is, how many of these little guys are watching this unfold this year? What's gonna come out of the woodwork next year from somebody we didn't expect? The BMC was probably just the beginning, and somebody somewhere knows it needs some competition as well. Supply and demand:) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leang Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 Here's what's funny. Every dealer gets a nice cost by volume. If I was a sales kat for said retailer let's just say for example that the cost for a 1DX is $5,200 - and the retailer sets it at $6,800. ok... sounds like ordinary high dslr profit... But then when you learn that a 4K version of it at about twice the price, and from my understanding the exact same build, but different firmware, that's a rape in manufacturing scheme! I'm wondering how Canon set the cost for retailers on the 1DC in justifying a "firmware" difference. Think about it. It would be bad business politics if they set the cost for the 1DC around $7000. You then see the profit gain from $12K. or who knows. what was the S-log price upgrade for the F3 when it was offered? premium pricings for firmware upgrades are one thing, but exagerrated ones are another! or can anyone justify the cost for this weird body scheme? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
richg101 Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 [quote name='Leang' timestamp='1353582801' post='22105'] Here's what's funny. Every dealer gets a nice cost by volume. If I was a sales kat for said retailer let's just say for example that the cost for a 1DX is $5,200 - and the retailer sets it at $6,800. ok... sounds like ordinary high dslr profit... But then when you learn that a 4K version of it at about twice the price, and from my understanding the exact same build, but different firmware, that's a rape in manufacturing scheme! I'm wondering how Canon set the cost for retailers on the 1DC in justifying a "firmware" difference. Think about it. It would be bad business politics if they set the cost for the 1DC around $7000. You then see the profit gain from $12K. or who knows. what was the S-log price upgrade for the F3 when it was offered? premium pricings for firmware upgrades are one thing, but exagerrated ones are another! or can anyone justify the cost for this weird body scheme? [/quote] it's a simple fact of "you pays your money, you get your camera" most retailers will not hold stock - it will be special order. Canon have simply priced it as a professional flagship stills camera for 7,000 and a motion picture camera bolted onto the back for another 5,000. find a 4k cinema camera that can serve paparazzi, product photographers, fashion, commercial and wedding photographers in the still photography domain. for that matter find a 4k ready motion picture camera for under 5,000 as it is. then find one with a full frame sensor? and a near waterproof/dustproof body. if the full hd of the 1dc is nearly as good as the c3oo it'll be a bargain. what will be eben more of a bargain is if ML crack the 1DX and open up the same specs as on the 1dc. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jgharding Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 It is such a cool thing, and such a shame they don't wanna shake shit up by pricing more aggressively. Ah well, what can you do, just put money elsewhere, it's the language they'll listen to! I think ML said they'll never do a 1D because it's not a "people's camera" (so they can't find all the bodies to risk either). Hats off for their principles! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScreensPro Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 The 1D-C is in a league of it's own, literally no peers. A large than s35 DSLR that shoots cinematic 4K video onto cheap media with cheap batteries. If you can't afford it, wait.... But don't hate on Canon because it's out of the league of the indie crowd, for now. New tech, especially in a niche market, will always cost a premium. 5 years ago i spent $10k+ to lug around a HVX200 and s35mm adaptor, now i can get a better image out of a GH2..... Just be patient and enjoy the great cameras in your price range.... You'll soon enough have your hands on a 4K DSLR in your price range Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bioskop.Inc Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 4/5 years ago you'd have to drop £2/3k on a Z1! Laughable now, but it was broadcast quality & used a lot. The 1DC looks a great all rounder & is aimed at Pros for that precise reason. I'm really excited about what ML will be able to do with the 7D & its dual processors! Everyone bangs on about that Canon's profits are down, but they still made a profit & that's what they see. I'm sure next year more companies will produce something more affordable & force the hand of big boys - it'll happen just be patient. The obsession of getting higher resolutions (2K or 4K) is only really practical if your market is a cinema screen, cause lets face it that's where it will shine & to actually spend that sort of cash on a camera that will be outdated in a year or so (if things continue as they seem to be) is crazy if you're not jobbing. You can rent a full RED kit (includes tripod etc...) for £250 a day & if you plan/script well you can shoot a short in that time - now that's a bargain! But hey, consumers are always going to throw their money at something. Just look at Electric Guitars: 90% of people who buy them will never play a gig or make a living & are quite willing to drop £2k+ on a Gibson - always have been always will be. Be glad with what you can afford & don't expect a 2/4K camera for under £1000 pounds anytime soon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leang Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 I guess I forgot that 4K TV acquisition is coming soon as well, so anything run and gun sports I guess the 1DC becomes very practical, and pros or companies will easily pay them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted November 22, 2012 Administrators Share Posted November 22, 2012 [quote name='ScreensPro' timestamp='1353587260' post='22112'] The 1D-C is in a league of it's own, literally no peers. A large than s35 DSLR that shoots cinematic 4K video onto cheap media with cheap batteries. If you can't afford it, wait.... But don't hate on Canon because it's out of the league of the indie crowd, for now. New tech, especially in a niche market, will always cost a premium. [/quote] New tech? Aside from the sensor (which is from a $6000 camera not a $12,000 one) this is not new tech at all. There's nothing material or in the manufacturing of this camera that justifies the price tag. They could have made a healthy margin at $5k on this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted November 22, 2012 Administrators Share Posted November 22, 2012 [quote name='Bioskop.Inc' timestamp='1353593897' post='22118']Everyone bangs on about that Canon's profits are down, but they still made a profit & that's what they see.[/quote] Indeed their profits are down. Remind me of my digital cinema upgrade path from the 5D Mark III again.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Andrew Reid Posted November 22, 2012 Administrators Share Posted November 22, 2012 [quote name='Leang' timestamp='1353582801' post='22105'] or can anyone justify the cost for this weird body scheme? [/quote] Like I say the firmware development R&D costs and re-wired circuitboard with a better heat sink do not in any way add up to doubling the 1DX's retail price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScreensPro Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 How can you possibly know? Do you know how much software costs? rerunning circuit board? testing? They might have a target figure of 1000 sales to regroup that money. That is alot of cameras to sell to a [b]very[/b] niche market. Your problem here is you are putting mass market costs on a product with a very finite market. Yes, you could agrue that Canon could have launched this at $6k-$8k and made many more sales.... But, in today's market, that is not garunteed. $6k-$8k is not small change and would still be out of reach for the majority of people here. but overall.... If you are first to launch a niche product, then you set your own price. Overpriced? As of now, it is probably the cheapest 4K solution out there that could be used on a feature (kitted with battery, lens and media). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FilmMan Posted November 22, 2012 Author Share Posted November 22, 2012 I agree with Andrew. $6000 seems excessive. Let's say the BMC sells 20000 cameras. It is a niche market that Canon had but is losing market share. If Canon gave better specs, do you think people would have been embracing BMC as they have? The Big Boys will not rock the market too much as it takes money off the table. Gopro has a 4K camera (although not 24 frames/s) however it is 2K (24 frames/s) for $400. They are making money at that price. It includes a lens. Surely, a giant company can offer those specs with an interchangeable lens for a reasonable price? Surely Gopro had to spend on research and development. Canon came out with the 5D2 years ago. Their upgrade path years later was the 5D3. People wanted better color space such as 8 bit/10 bit, 422. Nope. How about true 1080p without the shrinking then upscaling? Nope. Look how detailed the GH2 video is. Surely Canon could have offered. Sony is coming out with alot of cameras, but are the specs truly earth shattering? They seem to be towing the same line with respect to specs. If you are willing to pay $20K then the specs are excellent. Why can a new camera as the BMC offer a $3K camera with such good specs? Why can't an established entity do the same? An establish company has most of their R and D paid. Initially pricing only came down due to RED. In the past, you'd be paying a quarter of a million for top specs. RED upset the food chain. You'd think after the dslr revolution, Canon would have wanted to secure the market. They could have offered a better spec DSLR for $4500, and people would have bought - such as 422, 8 or 10 bit, better compression, real 1080p, etc. Instead they off not so much. They did develop the C300 but for $16000. I think mass appeal can be more profitable in the long term than making these niche markets. Sell more batteries, lenses, etc. You don't want the competition to gain market share either. Once you lose a customer then it could be years to gain them back. Or you may never get them back. Just ranting, and don't want to debate. Xiong 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScreensPro Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 [quote name='FilmMan' timestamp='1353609623' post='22130'] Why can a new camera as the BMC offer a $3K camera with such good specs? [/quote] Because they choose to comprimise in other areas.... your good specs (and mine, incidentally) are another man's "why bother with such a smaller sensor?". Your "great, it takes SSDs" are another man's "damn, SD cards are so much cheaper, lighter and i have 10 already". Under $10k, you will comprmise, for now at least. The 1D-C is a very strange and unique entity, I personally think it [b]is[/b] value for money... a 1D-X and a 4k cinema camera in a tiny package with cheap media/batteries that can go anywhere. I can understand people getting frustrated that it is similar tech to the 1D-X and thinking it should be priced likewise.... But business does not work like that. I've been paying 200% more for 10% extra power for decades with high end computers and the like... Nothing changes there.... cutting edge tech costs (hardware or software). Pro features cost. Niche features costs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FilmMan Posted November 22, 2012 Author Share Posted November 22, 2012 screen, the cost to manufacture the 1DC will probably be around the price of a 1DX to manufacture if not the same. point with BMC - they were not a camera company till now. Canon has been a camera company for years. BMC is able to offer quite a bit for the first go around. Their software, worth a $1000 is included too. Yes, the sensor is small, but hey, its their first crack. Canon started the DSLR revolution. They decided to go their own business path and that is their choice. They have lost market share in doing so. They may gain abit in some areas, but alot of new competition is coming. So who knows if it will have been worth it. When you have the lead, you should try to keep it especially in today's economic climate. Canon is going in unknown territory with their high end cameras. Let' say they could have sold an extra 40000 DSLR's with better specs. Don't you think that would trump a higher end niche market? Maybe? Now you have competition taking away their market share. Win perhaps in one area, however lose in the other. Why take the risk? Computing pricing? Pretty darn competitive and good pricing now. Cheers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScreensPro Posted November 22, 2012 Share Posted November 22, 2012 are there really 40,000 indie shooters who need 4K and have $6k in their pocket? The indie market really is not huge. I just think Canon should get a little more credit for being brave enough to be first out with a 4K DSLR. First out with a APS-H 4K cinema camera.... 1st out with a 4K system that can be setup to run all day for under $15k. They also have, by far, the smallest 4K system, the easiest to edit 4K system with broadcast ready codec and arguably the best low light 4K system on the market. If you forget about the 1D-X for a minute, can you really argue that the 1D-C is overpriced? It's a minor miracle. horses for courses, and sometimes the jockey is expensive... Just to get the horse to run 1% faster. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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.