Canon Cinema EOS C70 - Ah that explains it then!

[IronFilm]

5 hours ago, EphraimP said:

How many people actually shoot video on hybrid cams using the EVF? I totally understand a side-mounted EVF for shoulder mount cams, but have never seen anyone shoot video from the traditional photographer's position.

It is definitely a small minority of shoots I work on that the DoP is using an EVF. 
But those that do, seem to really like it and use it. I can understand why there is passion for it in the "pro-EVF" camp. 

[Video Hummus]

3 hours ago, Mmmbeats said:

I have a feeling that H.265, Long-GOP at 225Mbps might be even better because of efficiency at the allocated bitrate. 

I would choose H.265 if you have the hardware to work with it in post for the 50/60p stuff. It’s not a good capture format but it will have higher quality per bitrate than H.264. Depending on what profile they are using for H.265, 225Mbps is very sufficient for 50/60fps 4K. HFR video where there are 60/120 or more frames in a second each one is very similar so LongGOP compression works very well (except for lots of random motion of course).

[IronFilm]

3 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

I am wondering why the put the best chip and image in the stills camera.

Full frame.

8K.

But is it really "the best chip"?

Not for a target market which is S35 4K. 
Not for a target market which cares about RS, DR, and other factors more instead. 

[SteveV4D]

4 hours ago, IronFilm said:

But is it really "the best chip"?

Not for a target market which is S35 4K. 
Not for a target market which cares about RS, DR, and other factors more instead. 

To be fair RS on the R5 isn't that bad and DR could improve with the cLog3 update.  The R5 fails not for the sensor, or performance, but by its software induced limits on recording times.  Its a shame that Canon does a give and take policy with its gear and the C70 is no different.  

That said, I love what the camera offers, even if the lack of professional codecs like RAW or ProRes limit the camera in my eyes.  Its taking the small size of a mirrorless and adding proper video controls and features.  I'm in 2 minds about getting one.   

 

[Kisaha]

The codecs are just fine for the intended use. The sensor seems at least a generation and a half ahead of the C200 one. It has everything a small production company needs.

Most weddings are shoot with mirrorless these days, do not see many of those buy a C camera, only the "top" tier = which is low anyway..

This is the most exciting Canon release since the original C100 I believe, I am not sure where the catch is. They even offer an original speedbooster and I can use both my 18-135 nano and 70-200 white!

I mean, wtf Canon?! Are you seriously giving me everything I need????!!!!

I may go full in Canon this round, still waiting for the GH6, maybe it will be alright as a cheap solution together my Pocket and NX cameras and lenses, but Canon is on a roll..still can't decide on the R6 though..

[SteveV4D]

35 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

The codecs are just fine for the intended use. The sensor seems at least a generation and a half ahead of the C200 one. It has everything a small production company needs.

 

What is the intended use?  Even as a Wedding Videpgraoher, I have benefitted from BRAW for improve workflow and handling of colour grading.  When the R5 is due RAWlite, this is an omission and shouldn't be glossed over simply because of the C70s other more positive attributes.   It offers some of what I need, but not all.  Give this camera Cinema RAWlite and this would be a perfect camera for me. Maybe 4K downsampled from a 6K one would be a nice addition too.

[Mmmbeats]

When your starting point for the grade is a better quality image than the RAW coming out of previous cameras, I doubt you'll be missing much in terms of gradibility. 

Perhaps if you're doing quite extreme colour isolations for effect, or if you need to rescue a mistake, then you might miss RAW. But for most applications this sensor + codec combo is probably going to provide a better graded image than most previous RAW cameras (in the price range, obviously). 

Canon have made a doozy of a workhorse cinema camera in the C300 III. It really does look the business, and I wish I could afford one! 

Of course a lesser release is not going to share it's full feature set. What would be the sense in that for Canon? 

So you just have to ask - is this a reasonable compromise at the price point or not? 

Personally I think it's a very generous offer.  A truly top class image. Very decent codecs and frame rates. Bold new form factor. 

I don't think RAW is such an unreasonable omission. 

[SteveV4D]

11 minutes ago, Mmmbeats said:

 

I don't think RAW is such an unreasonable omission. 

It is when a photography camera gets it and in 8K....

Its not so much about heavy grades as giving a codec that plays well in editing suites even after grading.  H264 and H265 are deliverable codecs not editing codec  despite many believing them to be so.  

Its a great camera otherwise let down by a few things.  

[ade towell]

What are peoples options for a decent run around zoom with IS?

The 17-55mm 2.8 had a big vignette on the c200 and I think will do the same here - it could really do with a version 2. The 18-80mm T4.4 Canon lens is wonderful and has servo but is also expensive. That leaves the good old 24-105mm f4 plus speedbooster (still quite a chunk of money) but then your AF is compromised (only covers 60% I think I read with speedbooster). The 18-135 stm lens is good for outside run n gun but slow and not a very exciting image

The RF lenses are all full frame so not wide enough 

Any decently priced zooms with IS, it seems Canon like Sony have been neglecting s35 on the lens front these last few years?

[Mmmbeats]

28 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:

It is when a photography camera gets it and in 8K....

Its not so much about heavy grades as giving a codec that plays well in editing suites even after grading.  H264 and H265 are deliverable codecs not editing codec  despite many believing them to be so.  

Its a great camera otherwise let down by a few things.  

I have to admit, I transcode all of my footage routinely regardless of camera, so I just consider them as acquisition codecs.

[SteveV4D]

8 minutes ago, Mmmbeats said:

I have to admit, I transcode all of my footage routinely regardless of camera, so I just consider them as acquisition codecs.

Depends how much you shoot.  I would hate to do that for all I filmed...   

[SteveV4D]

13 minutes ago, ade towell said:

What are peoples options for a decent run around zoom with IS?

The 17-55mm 2.8 had a big vignette on the c200 and I think will do the same here - it could really do with a version 2. The 18-80mm T4.4 Canon lens is wonderful and has servo but is also expensive. That leaves the good old 24-105mm f4 plus speedbooster (still quite a chunk of money) but then your AF is compromised (only covers 60% I think I read with speedbooster). The 18-135 stm lens is good for outside run n gun but slow and not a very exciting image

The RF lenses are all full frame so not wide enough 

Any decently priced zooms with IS, it seems Canon like Sony have been neglecting s35 on the lens front these last few years?

I have the 24 to 105 EF lens.  So I'd probably get the speedbooster.  Though need another native lens for AF.

[Kisaha]

17 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:

Depends how much you shoot.  I would hate to do that for all I filmed...   

Suddenly all cameras have to have raw?! 12 months ago that wasn't even the norm. 3 years ago? 5 years ago? and how much you needed for that?

This is a fast turn around camera. Buy the C300 or C200 if you need Canon raw so much, or a Pocket 4K for 1/4 of the money, or any other option. C200 especially will trickle down in price considerably, there will be dead cheap ones in the wild really soon.

As simple as that.

You hate to do transcoding to all your footage, but have plenty of time to work raw files? 

The huge success of the C100 cameras, were/is the fact that you didn't need much time in post, that was the greatest selling point of those cameras, and sold really good. This is the C100mkII of the new age, so that is the intended use, there are other products more suitable for your needs, I am certain. 

One product can't please everyone.

The 18-80 is a perfect fit but quite pricey some will say, the cheap solution is the 18-135mm, dead cheap and sufficient for most run and gun needs.

[Mmmbeats]

22 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:

Depends how much you shoot.  I would hate to do that for all I filmed...   

I guess I'm used to it.  I think of it a bit like doing a rush print or something like that.  The cameras I use currently only shoot acquisition codecs.  I like zoning the edit - technical-creative-technical.  I get as much of the technical pain out of the way first so I can just 'flow' in the actual edit as much as possible.

I was interested in the C200, shooting RAW Lite with a transcode workflow, but the transcode times I tested were too long! (my machine wasn't up to editing RAW)

This is probably turning into a bit of a derail so feel free to ignore!  

[Hywel Phillips]

Years ago I saw a post explaining various companies' segmentation strategies, and I think it still holds true today.

Canon have always made cameras that lack one specific major thing that you take for granted on other cameras at the same price point, apart from their very top models. This is why they have the cripple-hammer reputation. There's always ONE thing that's just a disappointment. For the C70, I'd say it's the EVF. For the R5, obviously, it's the recording time limits. 

The one time they neglected to do that was the 5D Mark II and they're still dealing with the unexpected consequences of that internally, I think. 

Panasonic by contrast have always had the reputation of giving you one specific thing that everyone else's camera lacks at a given price point. For DVX100 it was progressive scan. For HVX200 it was solid state recording and HD (of a sort). For the AF100 it was slowmo in HD. It persists to this day - I have a GH5 purely because it offers PROPER anamorphic shooting without costing the same as an Alexa. (I only wish their AF was up to scratch for video). 

Sony's pitch has always been technical advances. But they cannot design a user interface to save their lives, either physical or virtual (menu systems). It's the same with every Sony product I own, from PlayStations to BluRays. Great product technically, bloody awful ergonomics. For example, my Sony Blu-Ray player ignores the eject button if it's on standby. Every other player I've ever owned knows that if I press the button, I want the disk to eject. Now.  Only Sony makes me turn the player on first (thus incurring an interminable boot sequence delay). 

RED's pitch has always been resolution and readout speed, facilitated by the best video codec there is. I still love my original RED Scarlet- in some ways it outperforms my FX9 and I'll probably keep it for decades. The main problem that is they tend to be assholes; the world would be a much better place with licenced REDcode RAW everywhere. 

And Arri's has always been targeting the top end, but I can't afford one so I don't know how they differentiate their cameras. 

The C70 and R5 show me that Canon are still just being Canon. The trick is to figure out where the missing feature is and does it kill your use case?

Cheers, Hywel

[Andrew Reid]

Good point. Panasonic aways chose to add a special feature or two, to chase market share and they have provided supreme value for money over the years. Where is the 10bit full frame camera from the other manufacturers at the same price as the S1 for instance? Or anamorphic cameras for under $2K. But people see a Canon badge and go mental. Another crippled very high margin product. The same people who would deride the lack of IBIS or EVF on a cheap mirrorless camera under $1000 seem to give Canon a pass when these are missing at $5500. I do get that it's a cinema camera and image is a big step up from C100. It is by no means a poor camera. I just personally would have found an EVF very useful. I'd also have preferred a full frame sensor. IBIS is another big one.

But yes if you are into crop sensor look with good dynamic range, I am sure the C70 ticks a lot of boxes.

[Kisaha]

this is a camera we were waiting for a few years now. I am surprised there is not more interest on the forum..

just 10 pages?

I remember it was 100 pages on the P4K one back in the day!

[SteveV4D]

2 hours ago, Kisaha said:

Suddenly all cameras have to have raw?! 12 months ago that wasn't even the norm. 3 years ago? 5 years ago? and how much you needed for that?

This is a fast turn around camera. Buy the C300 or C200 if you need Canon raw so much, or a Pocket 4K for 1/4 of the money, or any other option. C200 especially will trickle down in price considerably, there will be dead cheap ones in the wild really soon.

As simple as that.

You hate to do transcoding to all your footage, but have plenty of time to work raw files? 

The huge success of the C100 cameras, were/is the fact that you didn't need much time in post, that was the greatest selling point of those cameras, and sold really good. This is the C100mkII of the new age, so that is the intended use, there are other products more suitable for your needs, I am certain. 

One product can't please everyone.

The 18-80 is a perfect fit but quite pricey some will say, the cheap solution is the 18-135mm, dead cheap and sufficient for most run and gun needs.

Its not so much RAW, although RAWlite and BRAW have brought it to the masses; its about having an edit friendly codec.  Its about the ease of editing with what you shoot with without proxy or transcode.  I've shot in BRAW on a SSD drive and edited it directly on a laptop and delivered a video onsite within the hour.  So quick and works well with Resolve.  In comparison, H264 can take longer to edit.  I actually work quicker with BRAW in Resolve than H264 in Premiere.  Thumbnails load quicker, playback smoother so you can preview the finished video without encoding first.  Saves so much time.  

A Cinema camera should offer a professional codec for editing rather than a deliverable one you need to transcode. You say RAW workflow is as time intensive as transcoding H264, no its not.  The flexibility to work with what you have, to alter white balance and ISO so quickly can take the pain of correcting shots that didn't come out just right.  You can apply a LUT you used when filming for quick turnover or spend more time if you need to.

And yes, I have the P4K and soon P6K for that.  Its not unreasonable to ask for a similar workflow from a camera costing more.  

That said, I do like a lot about the camera.  The lack of proper codec is a negative, but for me the only major one.  I can live without the evf.  This camera ticks so many boxes for me; I am very tempted to look to buying one.  Its the camera the R5 should have been. 

With Canon it feels like specs are all over the place.  No consistent pattern across their line with what they offer.   The R5 should have the video recording specs of the C70 and the C70 those of the R5.  Then the R5 wouldn't need an overheating cripple to stop people from using it professionally and the C70 would be video camera of the decade.

[SteveV4D]

2 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

this is a camera we were waiting for a few years now. I am surprised there is not more interest on the forum..

just 10 pages?

I remember it was 100 pages on the P4K one back in the day!

A few years exactly.  We've been waiting for it for so long now, the World has since moved on to RAW, 8K and IBIS.  

[Kisaha]

7 minutes ago, SteveV4D said:

Its not so much RAW, although RAWlite and BRAW have brought it to the masses; its about having an edit friendly codec.  Its about the ease of editing with what you shoot with without proxy or transcode.  I've shot in BRAW on a SSD drive and edited it directly on a laptop and delivered a video onsite within the hour.  So quick and works well with Resolve.  In comparison, H264 can take longer to edit.  I actually work quicker with BRAW in Resolve than H264 in Premiere.  Thumbnails load quicker, playback smoother so you can preview the finished video without encoding first.  Saves so much time.  

A Cinema camera should offer a professional codec for editing rather than a deliverable one you need to transcode. You say RAW workflow is as time intensive as transcoding H264, no its not.  The flexibility to work with what you have, to alter white balance and ISO so quickly can take the pain of correcting shots that didn't come out just right.  You can apply a LUT you used when filming for quick turnover or spend more time if you need to.

And yes, I have the P4K and soon P6K for that.  Its not unreasonable to ask for a similar workflow from a camera costing more.  

That said, I do like a lot about the camera.  The lack of proper codec is a negative, but for me the only major one.  I can live without the evf.  This camera ticks so many boxes for me; I am very tempted to look to buying one.  Its the camera the R5 should have been. 

With Canon it feels like specs are all over the place.  No consistent pattern across their line with what they offer.   The R5 should have the video recording specs of the C70 and the C70 those of the R5.  Then the R5 wouldn't need an overheating cripple to stop people from using it professionally and the C70 would be video camera of the decade.

I understand what you say, I am just glad they offer as much! You describe a different kind of workflow though. When we say "fast turnaround", we mean minimum, or not at all post. At least that is how we do it in some fields, most of the times I do not even edit the footage, just give it to the editing department, these guys do not like tweaking things much, they ask mixed sound and whatever they can get from the already shot image. We are talking about national televised shows here (FS7 cameras mainly), so imagine for even faster and lower budgeted jobs..

all these with much respect to your opinion of course.

I personally know noone working raw for those, it is definitely not the standard in the industry, and we talking tv shows, not lesser jobs. IBIS is a staple NOT in cine cameras, I am not sure how suddenly is another negative, and 8K?! are you serious?!! 

I believe you may have to invest on the Ursa 12K then, it seems more suitable for your needs and you have the extra resolution to stabilize and crop for 8K delivery, this is NOT the camera, oh, and Ursa doesn't have IBIS of course.