Does Cinema EOS mark the end of high spec Canon DSLR video?

[Andrew Reid]

It's staying the same I can assure you of that.

[zenpmd]

This whole High ISO thing is a bit of a gimmick though. Who needs candlelight anyway? I am sorry but we could shoot a hollywood film on practically any DSLR and its been done, especially documentaries.

 

Also, its hilarious everyone is slagging off Canon but they havent actually disapointed us yet... we are coming to the end of the normal cycle on the 5d. The mk4 is the make or break. AND ITS GOING TO BE AMAZING. You heard it here first. 

 

People criticise 7dmk2 video, but given the 7d had to come out first, i dont think they want it to leapfrog the 5d. And given that there is no reason for that to be a camera of video given its high end sports and wildlife I dnot see why we would blame them for that....the 7d was an accidental dslr for video, there is no reason to continue that accident.

[zenpmd]

duplicate post

[douglaurent]

The A7S can go to 12,800 cleanly and it costs $2k. It's cleaner in low light at ISO 12,800 than the 1D C is at 6400 at "only 10,000 euros". Bargain I say, that 1D C. Bargain!

no, the A7s is not cleaner if all people would do setup both cameras right and treat them similarily in post.  the A7S has some in-camera-denoising that makes the images less sharp. after all steps in post, the cameras are pretty much the same.  but the bargain of the 1DC is 4K inside of the camera, and 4K from january 2013 on and not 2 years later.  the A7S is not usable for professional photography or timelapses, which means with an A7S you always need to carry around a second and third device (external recorder AND pro photo cam), which makes the A7S heavier, more complicated in workflow and as of today not much less expensive.   this forum lists A LOT of pros and cons about cameras, which is great - but then do list ALL facts and don't forget some really important ones.

[douglaurent]

the top blogs of this planet and their followers can really have an impact on the manufacturers. but the arguments need to be 100% on the spot and should not be too biased.  in the 90s i had to put the same pressure on companies whose products i needed to be improved through magazine articles and long lists of detailed cons i have sent directly to them.  now i am happy that EOSHD is doing that for me for free regarding new canon cameras.  it just needs ALL facts, so people from canon know that someone knows and judges about the status of their products in each and every way, and not just lists 90% of all perspectives regarding improvements.

[Guest 560a4aedcb80685284629074497fdc75]

the top blogs of this planet and their followers can really have an impact on the manufacturers. but the arguments need to be 100% on the spot and should not be too biased.  in the 90s i had to put the same pressure on companies whose products i needed to be improved through magazine articles and long lists of detailed cons i have sent directly to them.  now i am happy that EOSHD is doing that for me for free regarding new canon cameras.  it just needs ALL facts, so people from canon know that someone knows and judges about the status of their products in each and every way, and not just lists 90% of all perspectives regarding improvements.

 

This is the crux of what you are saying I think. This thread has unnecessarily sunk into brand war. I agree that if Andrew made his arguments a bit more measured and diplomatic they would be more likely to have some real-world impact. 

 

EOSHD is an influential blog. The core of this article is on the money. Canon are not in synch with the other stills/hybrid manufacturers with regard to video. But it's complicated. Companies are still finding their feet with digital cinema. Canon are having success with their cinema line. Look at how many pro videographers and broadcasters use Canon. Look at how many Oscar nominated films used Canon cameras. This has to be massive for their brand (across all their products). Why would they jeopardise that? 

 

Can you imagine Arrri or Red releasing a sub-$5000 camera that competed with Sony, Panasonic, etc? It would be extremely complicated for their branding. It would have to be better than the other offerings in the bracket, but not undercut their pro cameras. I know Canon aren't at the top of the table, but they are playing in the same league.

 

Will Panasonic continue to give us so much with their GH line when their Super-35 pro cameras arrive? Who knows. It will be complicated for them too.

 

Sony are the only company at the moment with decent specced cameras at every level, and look at how confusing their market strategy is (particularly with the FS7).

 

Digital cinema is still young and the dust has far from settled. But the fact remains that Canon's DSLR video sucks, and it will through the 5DMk4 at least. 

[Oliver Daniel]

I don't know what the point of this brand war is on this topic. 

 

If you want to spend money on a 1DC, go ahead. If you want to spend money on an A7S, go ahead. Buy whatever you want. Like whatever image you want. But don't bash each other in a war... it's just boring. 

 

I have my own preference for gear, and I'll give constructive advice to anyone. I might buy an A7S, because it has features I would benefit from creatively. "But what about the 1DC, it's great in low light!!??" Personally I don't have the cash for a 1DC, and besides, I couldn't justify the purchase if I did. The A7S would be fine, and I'd have much more money left for LENSES. 

 

My point being... instead of arguing, shouldn't those doing it speak more constructively about their choices and show examples of their work where the features of the "brand" has influenced the piece? 

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

Arguing and wars is what makes it fun anyway. Did you see NFS comments section after they updated to real user names? It's a desert over there, went down from 200 comments and huge debates to 2-3 comments agreeing or saying thank you.

This is kind of fun to watch actually.

[Astro]

Ummm Maybe have a play on the name EOSHD

Something like Every Opinion Should Have Depth...something like that, plays up the forum aspects of it.

I like that Andrew stated his opinions forcefully (except when I disagree ...a fair bit of the time LOL!!)

In fact no one really agrees on too much (ha ha ha) but its not boring!!

So the name could have something to do with, if you have an opinion, give it some depth!!

Thanks Andrew...Just send me a paypal payout for that idea.

Cheers 

[LunyAlex]

W...what's wrong with criticizing a manufacturer's shortcomings? 

Even if it's not the end of Canon, even if the 1DC is a great camera (for the price of a car).

 

I... don't assume many would still pick a 5D Mark3 over a GH4 when the former looks "out of focus" in all image quality comparisons. 

The 5Ds became a standard in enthusiast videography because they were good at the time for a fairly affordable price. 

Now Canon is more or less dead (in terms of exciting new things) in that same segment (No...not talking about the 12.000$ segment).

Why would you not state that from the top of your lungs?
By now I doubt Canon listen to criticism, but some companies sometimes do.

 

Sometimes a (mass) critical train of thought can sway a company towards improvement.

Why would you bring strawman arguments to defend the company? Yes, bash the living shit out of them, bash the living shit out of everyone if there's ever a reason, because that's the only way you might see improvement. Ever.

 

Canon's shortcomings in the lower price segment are factual. 

And I really don't think Canon make their money out of 1DCs.

And the average enthusiast can have a fairly strong influence in what the "masses" adopt with somewhat of a delay if their go-to company isn't really doing anything. 

 

Do you think the mass consumer doesn't hear 4K at least three times a week? 

Of course he does.

And of course it's working. It's just working slowly.

 

A parallel was (jokingly?) drawn in this thread between Canon and Nokia. 
Good parallel. 

I don't think Canon are gonna become irrelevant anytime soon, but they are stagnating ferociously and I really can't see why anyone would chose to say "Yea, but..." in the face of that.  

 

Why be content? 

Nobody's ever gained anything from being content. 

[maxotics]

delete wasn't on topic 

[Quirky]

I don't know what the point of this brand war is on this topic. 

 

Standard nerdytainment. 

 

 

 

If you want to spend money on a 1DC, go ahead. If you want to spend money on an A7S, go ahead. Buy whatever you want. Like whatever image you want. But don't bash each other in a war... it's just boring. 

 

My point being... instead of arguing, shouldn't those doing it speak more constructively about their choices and show examples of their work where the features of the "brand" has influenced the piece? 

 

Suppose they could, but they don't and they won't, for a rather obvious reason. Your argument doesn't take the social and emotional side of things into account. That's what this is all about.

 

Besides, showing off one's work to make a technical/brand-related point wouldn't really change anything. Sometimes it's the opposite. Case in point, the latest 500 or whatever topics in this forum alone that do have video samples. That's just how the cookie crumbles. 

[Guest Ebrahim Saadawi]

I truly wish someone woud scientifically explain why the A7s colours look so horrible to me. The worst I've seen from any digital camera. I am much more pleased with my Iphone and Note 3 colours than this! What's actually difference technically? What is it that ugly look I am seeing in every image shot with it? And as Maxotics say the ugliness seems much more visible in daylight images rather than lowlight ones at high ISOs.

How are the colours actually different from say a Nikon? I can 100% see there is a big difference, just can't put my hand on where it is. Is it the greens, reds and Blue hues?? Is it a colour cast on selective parts of the image that doesn't correct well? Why does it look so washed out even when cranking up the saturation to the breaking point? A mystery to me why I never liked an image by the A7s. If someone could somehow fix that colour issue and make it produce Nikon-like colours (like a 3D LUT? A custom profile? A grading/exposure formula?), I would definitely buy one, because other than that issue it's pretty much perfect.

I wish Andrew would run a scientific colour comparison between the A7s and D750/5D just to see where the problem lies (if there's one), and see how each camera records each colour.

[jax_rox]

I truly wish someone woud scientifically explain why the A7s colours look so horrible to me. The worst I've seen from any digital camera. I am much more pleased with my Iphone and Note 3 colours than this! What's actually difference technically? What is it that ugly look I am seeing in every image shot with it? And as Maxotics say the ugliness seems much more visible in daylight images rather than lowlight ones at high ISOs.

I'll scientifically explain it to you :)

You're watching the wrong videos ;)


The A7s is actually capable of really great images and colour out of the camera, it's just that most people shoot Slog and don't really know what to do with it. And the reason they shoot Slog is (I think) because they're not 100% happy with the standard picture profiles straight out of camera.
If I get some time I'll see if I can work on a picture profile that might give better results straight out of camera.

[Quirky]

I truly wish someone woud scientifically explain why the A7s colours look so horrible to me. 

 

What/how the XYZ colours look to you is subjective. It has little to do with science, apart from the science of human behaviour and sensory perception.

Colours, things and events have no meaning or value per se. 'Horrible' is an emotional attachment. It's all up to your personal perception, so there is not much point in 'scientifically explaining' why something appears horrible to you.

 

Just marry your Canon and get it over with. Let others be happy with their horrible colours. Each to their own.

[JazzBox]

Canon are just good enough for the 'masses' - we are specialist camera nerds on this forum and have found all the better alternatives to Canon and how to squeeze every last drop out of them quality wise.

 

People still walk into camera stores and online retailers and just buy a Canon because it has the brand reputation and changing ' the masses' to even think Panasonic or Sony let alone Samsung will still take time.

 

We are all believers - the masses have to still follow us!

 

There are still alot of Canon users on here who will not touch a mirrorless camera with an evf.

Exactly Andy! It's just crazy! I'm so happy with my G6, but lot of bands asked me: "Hey, why you don't use a 7D or a 5D?", then I show them some clips I made with Canon and some clips I made with Panasonic... and they instantly know why G6 is better! Not to talk about GH4! ;)

[JazzBox]

I shot on 5D for 3 years then because of Andrew and his GH2 work on this site I came over to EOSHD and wholely switched to Panasonic for all my work ,my Canons now only get used for a few stills.

I also switched from Canon to Panasonic THANKS to this great eye opening article: http://www.eoshd.com/2013/07/panasonic-g6-review-the-gh2-redux/


 

[JazzBox]

I preferred the image on the 1DC. But had more fun with the GH3. Who cares... The video had semi-naked ladies in it! 

I'm sure that an old iPhone 3G would have more dynamic range then an Alexa in that situation with semi-naked ladies :P

[mtheory]

If you want to understand the criticism against Canon, imagine a Ferrari that can only do 80KM/h.

[leeys]

Someone's a real freaking Canon fanboy here. It's amazing how easy it is to spot one.