How many sales are Canon losing from enthusiasts due to video shenanigans?

[Andrew Reid]

The Canon 90D targets wildlife shooters. I refuse to believe we're a smaller market than wild boar pig lovers.

Read the full article

[jpbelanger]

I don't know what they're doing exactly, but they're done by now. Even if they would come out with some kind of competition to the new BMPCC 6K, the S1h or the incoming (I hope) a7sIII, they would just cripple it in some way that the others don't, for color science's sake. BMPCC fills so much tasks, from trad run&gun to streaming cameras, A7sii still reigns as the king of low light, and the S1h is basically everything a photographer/videographer has ever wished for. What's left for Canon in this segment? What could they get out of it?

I guess the only way they could profit from this segment now would be to release some kind of Amira shoulder-style docu/broadcast camera at a decent price. But they'll never do that.

[MFTShooter]

I'd love to know how many Blackmagic Pocket Cinema 4Ks have been sold! These don't seem to show up in any sales stats that for example compare Sony vs Olympus sales. The camera months after release is very hard to find in stock. Finally ended up buying from a small dealer on the west coast as B&H and Amazon never had them in stock and I refuse to play the pre-order game.

Am both an Olympus and Panasonic shooter buy am incredibly happy about Blackmagic's philosophy of not playing games including making all their cameras be worldwide cameras and support for real RAW recording. There is no way the Japanese manufacturers will up their game if they don't see major competition from Blackmagic, DJI, etc in unit sales.

[Andrew Reid]

Pocket 4K/6K sit in a big ecosystem of software and hardware from Blackmagic. You can't isolate the sales figures of a couple of devices as all the other stuff is important for Blackmagic, and Pocket cameras help their business profile and ecosystem.

The main point is - if all these huge companies - Sony, Blackmagic, Nikon, Panasonic, Fujfilm, etc. feel that video on mirrorless cams and under $3k is a worthwhile thing. So Canon must be shooting themselves in the foot by being the odd one out. Cinema EOS don't count. Different thing altogether.

Simple as that.

[tomsemiterrific]

Speaking of Cinema EOS---Carlos Quintero has an extensive commentary on image comparison between the Pocket 4k, 6k, one of the Red cameras, and the C200.

He mentions he's always been a fan of the C200----but, he says, when he compares the image to the pocket 4 and 6ks, the image of the C200 looks like a video camera. As he is speaking he's showing the images---and he's absolutely right. The Blackmagic pockets are much better---obvious.

So, where's the Cinema EOS advantage?

 

[Alex Potemkin]

Bitter true. 

I switched to Sony a couple of years ago, because my PROFESSIONAL occupation required video together with photo, and Canon had nothing for me that time. So, I struggled with Sony A7RII which I hated very much, but I kept my Canon lenses, with a hope that something usable will be released. Ooopppss... When this A7RII piece of garbage finally died, I found that I can't buy nothing from Canon - again. Long awaiting EOS R? Sorry, cropped 4K video on the full-frame sensor is not what I can adopt. So, now I'm with Dony A7RIII which is something pretty usable, finally, and I started to purchase Sony's lenses... And looking for a most reliable video solutions like dedicated BM, or Panasonic - even GFX100, why not? 

I'm sorry, Canon. I loved you. I still love. But you don't love me back anymore. 

[Michael Steiner]

11 minutes ago, tomsemiterrific said:

So, where's the Cinema EOS advantage?

- Battery Life

- ND-Filters

- 4 Channel Audio-Recording

- 3 Audio-Inputs

- DPAF

- Service-Centers all around the World

- (maybe) Reliability

Of course this does not affect every user the same way, but for some – like me – this things matter... 

[Otago]

A 4k bayer sensor doesn't provide 1000 line pairs so what we are seeing in the pocket 6k is real 4K resolution ( i.e. 1000-ish line pairs). A 4K bayer sensor works out about 2.8K of actual resolution, I think that's why lots of people weren't blown away by moving to 4K vs HD from an over sampled sensor. Sticking with the Canon C lineup that means the real resolutions have been 1080p from the C300 ( 4k sensor over sampled to 1080p) C300 mk2 is 2.8K recorded in a 4K file and the rumoured C500 mk2 is going to be 4K from an over sampled 6K sensor. 

I think Canon are struggling to keep up with Sony, the one constant among all the new cameras we are all raving about is the Sony sensor in them ( I think ? Is anyone else making their own sensors apart from Canon ? ) It could be that they run very hot when sampling the full sensor and that's why they are only reading the full sensor in cameras that have fans and a decent thermal mass, or the processors and driving circuitry do. 

 

[BenEricson]

4 hours ago, tomsemiterrific said:

Speaking of Cinema EOS---Carlos Quintero has an extensive commentary on image comparison between the Pocket 4k, 6k, one of the Red cameras, and the C200.

He mentions he's always been a fan of the C200----but, he says, when he compares the image to the pocket 4 and 6ks, the image of the C200 looks like a video camera. As he is speaking he's showing the images---and he's absolutely right. The Blackmagic pockets are much better---obvious.

So, where's the Cinema EOS advantage?

First off, the C200, C300 MK2, are work horse cameras. You can literally shoot entire documentary with a bare bones package. The reliability, form factor, ND filters and XLR ports make things so easy. The batteries run for literally 4/5 hours. It is ridiculously easy to color grade. The skin tones have a softness and smoothness that the pocket just does not produce.

Also, this guy is a youtube review guy. The pocket 4k clips so damn hard. If you clip highlights, it looks terrible. His example shots are literally the best case scenario. He also keeps talking about "how accurate the green in the trees are." To be honest, the trees look like Sony green, with lots of yellow. Kind of sickly.

Sharper is not better. That pocket is looking harsh in comparison. It almost looks like the C200 has an extra scrim up to soften the light. The forehead and cheeks have this harshness in the highlights that literally does not exist with the C200.

 

[abehalpert]

I think we need to punish Canon for withholding features and trying to sell more gear by splitting their products into so many segments.

I considered buying a Z6 to reward Nikon for being the first to offer RAW out, but that's been a long time coming.

I love what Fuji is doing and wish the X-T3 were full-frame.

Even though I hate Sony color and build, I will probably buy the A7S3 if it checks out, as Sony cameras are increasingly in demand in my market. Although that could change if the C500mk2 takes off. But production houses are invested in Sony lenses and will probably see no reason to switch, especially if the FS7 successor offers 4k 120fps and the C300mk2 successor does not.

[buggz]

Just to say, my ol' 5DMkII system was one great run.

Seriously, untill the old mis-mangement is retired or fired, I will never look at another Canon ad, or anything else.

After the 5DMkII, Canon had died.

They will never change without new blood.

 

[Andrew Reid]

5 hours ago, Michi said:

- Battery Life

- ND-Filters

- 4 Channel Audio-Recording

- 3 Audio-Inputs

- DPAF

- Service-Centers all around the World

- (maybe) Reliability

Of course this does not affect every user the same way, but for some – like me – this things matter... 

Another guy who needs reminding of why EOSHD started... suddenly cost wasn't a barrier to entry any more, people could pick up a GH1 or 5D Mark II and shoot cinematic images for cheap.

Isn't that what's great about the Pocket 6K?

If the image stands up head and shoulders (even above) C200 RAW but costs FAR less, with arguably a better RAW codec (and internal ProRes) to boot... That is exciting.

Then again it's no surprise to long-time EOSHD members! I remember comparing the C300 early on (when pros were gushing over it) with the Samsung NX1 when it first came out. The 4K from the NX1 beat the shit out of the C300's image quality - yes, in terms of skintones and colour too.

You sure can shoot a documentary bare bones with some cameras more easily than others... Pick up a GH5 for instance, and you can shoot bare bones better than with a C200 thanks to the stabilisation and smaller size.

[mercer]

I think the C200 looked the best in the studio shot... the BM cameras made the girl look sickly and two-dimensional in comparison. I even preferred the C200 over the Red Helium (I hope I don’t get a cease and desist order).

With that being said, I still believe Canon is making a huge mistake taking 24p out of their “lower” tiered cameras... regardless of their reason for doing it. But at the end of the day, it doesn’t really matter, Canon does not offer an inexpensive camera that I am interested in, so if/when I am in the market for such a camera, I will look to another brand.  

[Patrick B.]

4 hours ago, BenEricson said:

Sharper is not better.

Amen. A lot of people rave about sharpness, but that is the exact opposite of what I look for in an image.  It’s one reason I’ve enjoyed shooting on Canon over Sony (despite the disappointing lack of features in their lower tier cameras).

[DataMeister]

7 hours ago, BenEricson said:

First off, the C200, C300 MK2, are work horse cameras. You can literally shoot entire documentary with a bare bones package. The reliability, form factor, ND filters and XLR ports make things so easy. The batteries run for literally 4/5 hours. It is ridiculously easy to color grade. The skin tones have a softness and smoothness that the pocket just does not produce.

Also, this guy is a youtube review guy. The pocket 4k clips so damn hard. If you clip highlights, it looks terrible. His example shots are literally the best case scenario. He also keeps talking about "how accurate the green in the trees are." To be honest, the trees look like Sony green, with lots of yellow. Kind of sickly.

Sharper is not better. That pocket is looking harsh in comparison. It almost looks like the C200 has an extra scrim up to soften the light. The forehead and cheeks have this harshness in the highlights that literally does not exist with the C200.

I'll admit, Canon still seems to have the best color scientists on the planet. They may be floundering around in their selection of popular products, but when they do so get something out, the color balance is usually better than the competition.

[TheRealOG]

lol the Canon excuses. The c200’s slow motion is pretty bad compared to what’s available from other DSLMs! If I pay 6-7k for the c200 pkg, the DPAF won’t be enabled with the 120fps. What’s so great about DPAF if you can’t use it at will? C100mkii... DPAF can’t be used throughout the whole sensor, unless you’re using an USM lens, and even then it’s the slowest of the bunch. C300 doesn’t have slow motion. The only camera with decent slow motion is the 1dxmkii, but you need to use MotionJpeg... Ugh. 

2 hours ago, DataMeister said:

I'll admit, Canon still seems to have the best color scientists on the planet. They may be floundering around in their selection of popular products, but when they do so get something out, the color balance is usually better than the competition.

They don’t have the best color science. The video is hella mushy. 

[The ghost of squig]

I haven't bought any Canon gear since 2012. Since then the 5D Mk3 with Magic Lantern has been my workhorse. The Pocket 4K beats the 5D at everything except color, but it's very close, and it can match the 5D pretty well without a lot of work. With a few accessories, I can get an image that's equal to or better than any of Canon's pro cameras except in extremely low light, but it's a lot cheaper to just buy (or rent) a 2K equivalent LED, or use a very fast lens. I shoot a lot in low light, and I can't imagine a scenario where the Pocket 4K wouldn't be enough. If the Sigma FP or A7sIII deliver on raw, great color, and great AF, it's goodbye Canon.

[Video Hummus]

8 hours ago, TheRealOG said:

lol the Canon excuses. The c200’s slow motion is pretty bad compared to what’s available from other DSLMs! If I pay 6-7k for the c200 pkg, the DPAF won’t be enabled with the 120fps. What’s so great about DPAF if you can’t use it at will? C100mkii... DPAF can’t be used throughout the whole sensor, unless you’re using an USM lens, and even then it’s the slowest of the bunch. C300 doesn’t have slow motion. The only camera with decent slow motion is the 1dxmkii, but you need to use MotionJpeg... Ugh. 

...And I think this why Sony is slowly overtaking them.

I honestly think Canon is just riding the consumer camera train with their brand and logo as the ticket for as long as possible with almost zero investment because there is not much profits in it anymore.

When that train loses steam they will fall back on their camera patents and lens designs and license those.

I find it hard to believe there is zero foresight at the management of this company. And don’t tell me it’s a Japanese thing. Other Japanese camera companies seem to get it. 

[horshack]

6 hours ago, Video Hummus said:

...And I think this why Sony is slowly overtaking them.

I honestly think Canon is just riding the consumer camera train with their brand and logo as the ticket for as long as possible with almost zero investment because there is not much profits in it anymore.

When that train loses steam they will fall back on their camera patents and lens designs and license those.

I find it hard to believe there is zero foresight at the management of this company. And don’t tell me it’s a Japanese thing. Other Japanese camera companies seem to get it. 

Agree, the camera market has been collapsing for some time and I think Canon just chose to limit its R&D investment to maximize its profit and keep the cash-cow going for as long as they could. They might have been able to squeeze some additional unit sales by targeting hybrid/video shooters with less-crippled offerings but they probably decided it wasn't useful since the market is seen falling into a hyper-competitive, lower-margin business anyway, with insufficient volume on the low end to amortize their R&D and manufacturing capital investments. Such is not the case for their professional video division so crippling the video on the prosumer/enthusiast offerings was probably seen as an additional safeguard against cannibalization of sales of that division.

[MochaP]

From my understanding, color science and video codec are part of the story of Canon’s failure. There were several more fatal mistakes being made by Canon itself in the past five years. Before Sony released the first 4K camera A7S, Canon occupied most of the video shooting marketing because most of the photographers, especially in wedding photography sector wanted to manage the equipment easier thus they purchase all Canon stuffs from bodies to wide range of EF lenses. This was the good old day of Full HD movie that was still adequate for the producers facing the average consumer market.

Canon reserved the color profile and 4K exclusively for the Cinema EOS and lured the producers to buy the expensive movie body which could utilize their EF lenses to “save” money from buying extra filmmaking lenses.  In certain sense, Canon slowed down its step to improve the video technology because they believed 4K were for the professional and wouldn’t be the mainstream in the coming five years. And the users’ loyalty to EF lenses will help it maintained the sales of camera body.

However, Sony thought differently and tried to be the bad boy to ruin the lenses-monopolization of Canon by using the trick – the EF to E-mount adapter. When Sony A7S entered the market all wedding photographers and filmmakers just went crazy with the most economic 4K solution at that period. The adapter helped Sony to buy time and boost sales during the days without enough good choices of E-mount lenses. Canon couldn’t do anything because the patent of EF mount was already expired which meant it was going to be exploited by other camera brands.

This smart move ruined the plan of Canon entirely but it still did not want to face the truth that 4K should be getting cheaper and more popular in the following years. Instead of releasing 4K in the EOS DSLR line, it launched the stupid XC10 as responding to the need of 4K in the prosumer market. The situation getting worse when more brands and various kind of equipment penetrated the market such as GoPro 4 Black, DJI Inspire 1, iPhone 6S, etc. I still remember my first 4K camera was LG G4 in 2015!

But even worse that actually, Canon’s technology of CMOS hasn’t been improved much after 5D mark II. The merely increased pixels and boring ergonomic design just losing all its charm . The only reason of buying Canon is just because the users are photojournalists who need weather and dust sealing in the tough environment. Sony (with EF lenses), GoPro, DJI and iPhone take its place in video taking position. Otherwise, there are not much reason to have DSLR with lame video spec. EOS m6 mark II may be the new hope. But what Canon should do that is releasing more power in color profiles and in body RAW recording. Otherwise, a little Sony RX100 mk VII is still able to blow it away.

Dinosaur should die anyway but usually slowly.