Canon 1Dc $4,999

[mkabi]

You know what... just in case.... C-log never comes to the 1DXII. Just because there is no "C" symbol on the 1DXII

And, they discontinue the whole DSLR Cinema EOS line.

This may be your last chance to get a FF EOS with C-log.

And, it is mighty tempting to get a 1DC + Used C500 (for slow-mo) combo.

Then again... what is Canon going to drop for photokina & IBC???

 

[TheRenaissanceMan]

12 hours ago, DBounce said:

14 FPS stills not ground breaking enough for you. 16 FPS in liveview?

The 1DC already had 12FPS stills with 14 in live view, so...groundbreaking new features? More of a slight refinement. Can't say I'd particularly need or notice the upgrade for my work. YMMV.

[Rinad Amir]

2 hours ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

The 1DC already had 12FPS stills with 14 in live view, so...groundbreaking new features? More of a slight refinement. Can't say I'd particularly need or notice the upgrade for my work. YMMV.

Shoots 4k 60p

frame grabs

better batterie

newer sensor

and alot more maybe after canon engineers do some magic tweak 

 

[TheRenaissanceMan]

5 hours ago, Rinad Amir said:

Shoots 4k 60p

frame grabs

better batterie

newer sensor

and alot more maybe after canon engineers do some magic tweak 

 

We were discussing stills features.

Haven't heard much if any difference in battery life, and the new sensor doesn't appear to have any DR advantage over the old one.

[DBounce]

8 hours ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

We were discussing stills features.

Haven't heard much if any difference in battery life, and the new sensor doesn't appear to have any DR advantage over the old one.

Really? Well FYI, improving dynamic range was the reason for the redesign of the new sensor. You can read about it here.

[Michael Ma]

On 7/27/2016 at 10:24 PM, mkabi said:

I suspect that the the 5DC will be a repackaged 1DC and thats why they are trying to empty the inventory of the 1DC. And a price drop makes just as much sense. Then they can also add C-log to the 1DXII and the Canon world will make sense again.

I know it's not likely, but whether Canon likes it or not, the 5D Mark III turned into what would have been a 5Dc (5D3 with Magic Lantern).  Canon should stop fighting it and give people what they want.  5D body, raw video or 1080p 10-bit 4:2:2 or 4K up to 60p with C-Log at around $3500.  The 1Dc....I know it's a very capable device, but how many did they sell in comparison to the 5D3?  And how many people used the 5D3 for video compared to the 1Dc?  I would bet Canon lost a ton of money on the 1Dc, XC-10, C100, C300, C500.  They are all very niche products, so different from each other, compared to the 5D which is the industry standard for photos and was a little bit for video.

[DBounce]

1 hour ago, Michael Ma said:

I know it's not likely, but whether Canon likes it or not, the 5D Mark III turned into what would have been a 5Dc (5D3 with Magic Lantern).  Canon should stop fighting it and give people what they want.  5D body, raw video or 1080p 10-bit 4:2:2 or 4K up to 60p with C-Log at around $3500.  The 1Dc....I know it's a very capable device, but how many did they sell in comparison to the 5D3?  And how many people used the 5D3 for video compared to the 1Dc?  I would bet Canon lost a ton of money on the 1Dc, XC-10, C100, C300, C500.  They are all very niche products, so different from each other, compared to the 5D which is the industry standard for photos and was a little bit for video.

Well after "you" solve the technical problems for getting 4k 60p out of a 5D sized body without the need for all the heatpiping that the larger bodies accommodate,  I'm sure Canon will be happy to sell it.

[The Chris]

24 minutes ago, Michael Ma said:

I would bet Canon lost a ton of money on the 1Dc, XC-10, C100, C300, C500.  They are all very niche products, so different from each other, compared to the 5D which is the industry standard for photos and was a little bit for video.

Huh? I would bet they've made a ton of money on the cinema line. In Canon's last annual report the Cinema line was spotlighted as a segment for horizontal expansion moving forward - in other words its something they're plowing more resources in order to expand its reach. This isn't something they would do if they "lost a ton of money." We already have rumors of mkIII versions. The KPI's and gross profit ratio's show high margin cameras are doing well for them as unit volume decreases. Expanding the Cinema EOS reach is part of the next 5-year phase of their long term strategy, again not likely if it were not making money. The C100/300's have become one of the standard cameras in TV and news production, and virtually every rental house stocks them. All of those cameras you listed share components with high volume models which lowers development costs.

[Rinad Amir]

13 hours ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

We were discussing stills features.

Haven't heard much if any difference in battery life, and the new sensor doesn't appear to have any DR advantage over the old one.

Canon did re design sensor for better DR  

[OliKMIA]

On 7/28/2016 at 3:00 PM, DaveAltizer said:

I don't understand why you guys are arguing this. 1dc is a cinema camera. The 1dxii is not. Sounds like justifying a purchase to me. Just be careful with how you guys argue these things unless you're using these cameras in actual professional shooting environments. I can tell you from experience that shooting with a dslr in a set environment again kinda sucks. DSLRs were never supposed to be used on set. We just made them work. 

 

Cant argue with that image tho and c log on the 1dc looks better than any of the other C cameras in my opinion. 

Just be clear, I haven't used any of these 2 camera but apart from the C-Log, what differentiate the 1Dc over the 1Dx Mk2 in term of being cinematic ? Less rolling shutter ? Better ergonomics ?

[TheRenaissanceMan]

3 hours ago, Rinad Amir said:

Canon did re design sensor for better DR  

 

9 hours ago, DBounce said:

Really? Well FYI, improving dynamic range was the reason for the redesign of the new sensor. You can read about it here.

Every hands on test I've seen shows no meaningful DR improvement from the 1DX to the Mark II, regardless of Canon's intent. If I've missed one that shows otherwise, I'd be pleasantly surprised to be wrong.

[Luke Mason]

20 minutes ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

 

Every hands on test I've seen shows no meaningful DR improvement from the 1DX to the Mark II, regardless of Canon's intent. If I've missed one that shows otherwise, I'd be pleasantly surprised to be wrong.

1DX II has worse DR than 1DX/1DC in video mode

 

 

[TheRenaissanceMan]

1 minute ago, Luke Mason said:

1DX II has worse DR than 1DX/1DC in video mode

 

 

We were discussing its stills capabilities.

My understanding was that DR was identical for photos, and the 1DC had the edge in video because of C-LOG.

[Luke Mason]

Just now, TheRenaissanceMan said:

We were discussing its stills capabilities.

My understanding was that DR was identical for photos, and the 1DC had the edge in video because of C-LOG.

without C-log, 1DX II has more chroma noise in the shadow compared to 1DC when shooting Prolost Flat profile.

[Dave Maze]

4 hours ago, OliKMIA said:

Just be clear, I haven't used any of these 2 camera but apart from the C-Log, what differentiate the 1Dc over the 1Dx Mk2 in term of being cinematic ? Less rolling shutter ? Better ergonomics ?

Better DR for video with C Log. HDMI output options better. Special heatsink designed for 4K video. Super 35 mode. Compatibility with Canon Cine glass. And I'm sure internal juju that was tested and designed specifically for cinema. If you're not worried about any of these things then there is no reason to argue it really.

Cinema5d did a test with both and 1DC still outperforms the 1DXII for video. https://***URL not allowed***/canon-1d-x-mark-ii-vs-canon-1d-c-which-one-shoots-better-video/

[DBounce]

10 hours ago, DaveAltizer said:

Better DR for video with C Log. HDMI output options better. Special heatsink designed for 4K video. Super 35 mode. Compatibility with Canon Cine glass. And I'm sure internal juju that was tested and designed specifically for cinema. If you're not worried about any of these things then there is no reason to argue it really.

Cinema5d did a test with both and 1DC still outperforms the 1DXII for video. https://***URL not allowed***/canon-1d-x-mark-ii-vs-canon-1d-c-which-one-shoots-better-video/

The mount is exactly the same on both cameras,  so not sure what you mean by "compatibility with with Canon Cinema glass". I noticed no incompatibility when I used the Canon CN-E 24mm T1.5 L F Cine Lens on mine. As for the heat sink, it's exactly the same one that was in the 1DC. 

Internal "juju"? Seriously? Now you're just making $h!t up.

The real difference is c-log. Add that via a firmware update to the 1DX Mkii and the DR will blow the 1DC out of the water, as the 1DC shared the same senor with the older 1DX Mk1. Doubt the validity of what I'm saying? Here is a Cinema5D article that addresses the internal difference of the 1DC vs the 1DX Mk1.  After much research Canon responded with the details regarding the hardware differences between the two models. As you will see, the 1DC does in fact share the exact same previous generation sensor from the 1DX Mk1. And as test have shown the 1DX Mkii redesigned sensor easily best all prior Canon sensors.

 

[TheRenaissanceMan]

1 hour ago, DBounce said:

The mount is exactly the same on both cameras,  so not sure what you mean by "compatibility with with Canon Cinema glass". I noticed no incompatibility when I used the Canon CN-E 24mm T1.5 L F Cine Lens on mine. As for the heat sink, it's exactly the same one that was in the 1DC. 

Internal "juju"? Seriously? Now you're just making $h!t up.

The real difference is c-log. Add that via a firmware update to the 1DX Mkii and the DR will blow the 1DC out of the water, as the 1DC shared the same senor with the older 1DX Mk1. Doubt the validity of what I'm saying? Here is a Cinema5D article that addresses the internal difference of the 1DC vs the 1DX Mk1.  After much research Canon responded with the details regarding the hardware differences between the two models. As you will see, the 1DC does in fact share the exact same previous generation sensor from the 1DX Mk1. And as test have shown the 1DX Mkii redesigned sensor easily best all prior Canon sensors.

 

Do you have a link to any such test? Because the ones I've seen show no meaningful improvement in DR.

[Luke Mason]

2 hours ago, DBounce said:

The mount is exactly the same on both cameras,  so not sure what you mean by "compatibility with with Canon Cinema glass". I noticed no incompatibility when I used the Canon CN-E 24mm T1.5 L F Cine Lens on mine. As for the heat sink, it's exactly the same one that was in the 1DC. 

Internal "juju"? Seriously? Now you're just making $h!t up.

The real difference is c-log. Add that via a firmware update to the 1DX Mkii and the DR will blow the 1DC out of the water, as the 1DC shared the same senor with the older 1DX Mk1. Doubt the validity of what I'm saying? Here is a Cinema5D article that addresses the internal difference of the 1DC vs the 1DX Mk1.  After much research Canon responded with the details regarding the hardware differences between the two models. As you will see, the 1DC does in fact share the exact same previous generation sensor from the 1DX Mk1. And as test have shown the 1DX Mkii redesigned sensor easily best all prior Canon sensors.

 

Without C-log: 1DX II has noisier shadow than 1DC/1DX (in Prolost flat profile)

With C-log: If C-log comes to 1DX II, it will have the same DR as 1DC in C-log mode, due to 8bit M-JPEG engine, Canon Log2/3 cannot be implemented as they were designed for minimum 10bit quantisation. Therefore, the original C-log which was designed for 8bit has to be used, which has about 12 stops DR. In other words, even if its sensor had 16+ stops DR in RAW stills mode, video DR will be capped as it is governed by a 8bit gamma curve.

[DBounce]

1 hour ago, Luke Mason said:

Without C-log: 1DX II has noisier shadow than 1DC/1DX (in Prolost flat profile)

With C-log: If C-log comes to 1DX II, it will have the same DR as 1DC in C-log mode, due to 8bit M-JPEG engine, Canon Log2/3 cannot be implemented as they were designed for minimum 10bit quantisation. Therefore, the original C-log which was designed for 8bit has to be used, which has about 12 stops DR. In other words, even if its sensor had 16+ stops DR in RAW stills mode, video DR will be capped as it is governed by a 8bit gamma curve.

So if what you say pans out DR would be at least the same,  but you would also gain far less rolling shutter,  4k 60p, DPAF plus all the other advantages of the newer camera. Essentially, there would be zero case for the 1DC asside from lower cost. I was sold on the 1DX Mkii even without c-log, as the DPAF makes working with shallow DoF on a gimbal a painless task... and 4k 60p is a great feature. 

2 hours ago, TheRenaissanceMan said:

Do you have a link to any such test? Because the ones I've seen show no meaningful improvement in DR.

http://www.dxomark.com/Cameras/Compare/Side-by-side/Canon--EOS-1D-X-Mark-II-versus-Canon-EOS-1Dx___1071_753

[Liam]

8 minutes ago, DBounce said:

So if what you say pans out DR would be at least the same,  but you would also gain far less rolling shutter,  4k 60p, DPAF plus all the other advantages of the newer camera. Essentially, there would be zero case for the 1DC asside from lower cost. I was sold on the 1DX Mkii even without c-log, as the DPAF makes working with shallow DoF on a gimbal a painless task... and 4k 60p 

so, better video dynamic range, no in camera sharpening, for lower cost.

How much better is the rolling shutter?