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

[Guest 560a4aedcb80685284629074497fdc75]

:lol:  :lol:  :lol:

[Quirky]

double post due browser/server hiccup, deleted the duplicate. 

[Quirky]

And yet here you are on page 8.

 

Yes, I'm here like everybody else, with the same lame excuse.

 

Since the question you asked above can be exhaustively covered with two short sentences, no wonder people tend to wander off topic and start chatting about everything but the proverbial high spec Canon video cameras under $5000 for the next eight or more pages. Just for the heck of it.

 

Rather than purely technical or even commercial, it's an emotional topic which thus attracts chatter, and this is not the first throwing-a-tantrum-at-Canon thread you have started recently. 

 

 

They will move eventually, everyone needs to get over it. Use something else under $5000. Plenty of options. Life goes on. :)

 

Nuff said. That sums it up perfectly. 

 

Now we can all carry on chatting and bickering about something more interesting for the next eight pages.  :P

[dishe]

I know I'm a little bit late to this party, but I just wanted to add that I think DSLRs in general are on their way out, even in photography. Its just that no one told the photographers yet. 

 

Relevant article:

http://techcitement.com/hardware/the-obsolescence-of-the-dslr-camera/

[Quirky]

Its just that no one told the photographers yet. 

 

 

Surely you mean no one told the Canikon shooters yet.  ;)

[Andrew Reid]

Now we are on page 9, by the same token I'm wondering how I ended up with someone with 459 posts on my own site (like a virus on each page) berating me every-time he reads something he doesn't agree with. It doesn't seem like a fair deal does it!? I give him a platform as a filmmaker and 459 posts of server bandwidth, and in return he says I am flogging a dead horse! Canon may be a dead horse but I have nothing to flog!

[Andrew Reid]

I know I'm a little bit late to this party, but I just wanted to add that I think DSLRs in general are on their way out, even in photography. Its just that no one told the photographers yet. 

 

Relevant article:

http://techcitement.com/hardware/the-obsolescence-of-the-dslr-camera/

 

Before DSLRs die out for photography, manufacturers have to sort the mirrorless lenses, AF and offer more full frame stuff (looking at you Panasonic & Fuji). Otherwise DSLRs will trundle on forever.

 

AF is still not good enough and nobody has a full frame mirrorless range of lenses to match Canon or Nikon.

 

Until that happens, it is easier to "get shit done" as a working photographer on Canon & Nikon gear professionally, unless you are using manual focus lenses and adapters - in that situation then mirrorless is better because you can focus more precisely through the viewfinder.

 

For video it's a no-contest at the moment... not just in terms of specs or performance... but what use does a mirror have for video? It is a hinderance. 1D C was worst camera ergonomically I ever used for shooting video with. Worse than their low end DSLRs and much worse than the 5D Mark III with Magic Lantern.

 

Despite that I still hold out hope that one day Magic Lantern will be brave and dive into the 1D X, unlocking 4K & adding focus peaking, etc. Because we all know it's essentially a 1D C underneath. The 1D X with 4K if it drops below $3000 used would be a lot more in league with the others... NX1, GH4 and A7S in particular.

 

---

 

It baffles me why Canon's success seems a mystery to some of the trailing manufacturers sales-wise like Panasonic and Olympus. This isn't hard to fix guys. You need a full frame sensor, plenty of fast primes, a couple of fast zooms, AF needs to be as good and that really is about it. The rest they're already very strong at. Photographers are not going to all suddenly dump full frame Canon stuff and go to Panasonic or Olympus when they have so much smaller sensors. If Panasonic wants to lead, they have to follow what Sony have been doing and do it better. Takes a lot of resources but it can be done. Micro Four Thirds is a great system... it's also been a waste of time... they should keep just the GH4 and LX100, then focus on bringing out a new full frame system - Lumix FX. Then the serious doors will start opening, pros will adopt it and the micro four thirds stuff can continue to provide for the niches like GH4 is doing so well with video.

[Guest 560a4aedcb80685284629074497fdc75]

Now we are on page 9, by the same token I'm wondering how I ended up with someone with 459 posts on my own site (like a virus on each page) berating me every-time he reads something he doesn't agree with. It doesn't seem like a fair deal does it!? I give him a platform as a filmmaker and 459 posts of server bandwidth, and in return he says I am flogging a dead horse! Canon may be a dead horse but I have nothing to flog!

 

I wouldn't worry about the platform thing. Some people (I mention no names) don't actually use this site to share their work or knowledge. They just do 'quirky' things like complain about what everybody else is doing wrong.

 

Yep, I've had this s**t from him too.

[jax_rox]

Because they have the Cinema EOS line. They position themselves in a different league.

 

Arri has no sub $5000 camera, neither does RED. Neither does, errrr.... well, that's it. 

At least they attempt to position themselves in a different league. Arri has no sub $40,000 camera. Which is the same price as REDs top of the line camera, and basically double the price of Canon's top of the range. 

 

Canon saw a gap in the market and introduced a line of cameras in the $5-20k range and basically carved themselves a niche market in the documentary/run n gun TV market. The cameras were relatively affordable, delivered image quality good enough for television, and took advantage of the existing lenses and accessories of many shooters, or allowed shooters to take advantage of Canon's comparatively cheap (compared to normal television or cinema lenses), yet still decent quality lenses.

 

Canon don't have a contender at the top of the range. Even the C500 struggles to gain traction as a viable option for an A camera, or even B camera in many cases.

 

Sony were a bit more careful, and have brought out a range of cameras in all markets that really solidifies their position, and allows a solid upgrade path for shooters. You can buy into Sony's ecosystem, and keep things like raw recorders and the like as you move from camera body to camera body (much like RED). 

Sony also developed their FZ lens mount system that allows you to put just about any lens you want on the camera. Unlike Canon, where you have to lock in your choice of EF or PL mount when you purchase your camera, and can't really change your mind down the track, or when a different project pops up. With Sony you can use EF glass, or you can use PL glass if you want. Even on a RED camera you can change lens mounts if you need to shoot with different lenses.

 

It seems that Canon rushed to be the first into that mid-range camera market, and it has worked for them. But they seemed to make a lot of assumptions that may have even been true of the time. But now the market has changed, and there are viable and better options from a number of different manufacturers. I think they've painted themselves into somewhat of a corner and I will be interested to see how they get themselves out of it. 

[leeys]

Before DSLRs die out for photography, manufacturers have to sort the mirrorless lenses, AF and offer more full frame stuff (looking at you Panasonic & Fuji). Otherwise DSLRs will trundle on forever.

 

AF is still not good enough and nobody has a full frame mirrorless range of lenses to match Canon or Nikon.

I don't really agree with you on the full-frame thing - a few of us are doing work on the smaller sensors. 35mm isn't the professional option, like how some MF snobs back in the film days were. Like in film, we have a choice of sizes to work with, and some of us just use the smaller ones that's good enough (like 35mm, which to me is probably worse than a 1" sensor in some areas, depending on the conditions and film stock used).

 

What's really missing is the AF - it's just not good enough to cover every situation. Lenses are easier to overcome if the mount has enough traction.

[Quirky]

Now we are on page 9, by the same token I'm wondering how I ended up with someone with 459 posts on my own site (like a virus on each page) berating me every-time he reads something he doesn't agree with. 

 

"Berating you?" "Every time?" Really?

Well, if that's what you need to tell yourself, so be it.

 

I give him a platform as a filmmaker and 459 posts of server bandwidth, and in return he says I am flogging a dead horse! 

 

Nope, that's not what I said. 

When I said "not much point in beating that dead horse for eight more pages" I was not referring to you, or even your comments in this thread, Andrew. I thought it was clear enough in the given context. Suppose it wasn't, after all. So my mistake, poor choice of words, sorry about that.

The topic appears to be more sensitive than I realised, too, for some reason.

 

It doesn't seem like a fair deal does it!?

That's easy to fix. 460 posts sounds like a nice round number, doesn't it. Let's keep it at that, shall we. 

Cheers.

[Guest 560a4aedcb80685284629074497fdc75]

TFFT

 

yawn

[Trias]

@Ebrahim Saadawi

Can you guess what camera this was shot on, according to colors? :P

(Canon 5D mk III, Sony a7s or Panasonic GH4)

[Guest 560a4aedcb80685284629074497fdc75]

A7S

[animan]

TFFT

 

yawn

 

whats with the bully behaviour? quirkys posts were occasionaly provocative but generally respectful and interesting i think

[Guest 560a4aedcb80685284629074497fdc75]

whats with the bully behaviour? quirkys posts were occasionaly provocative but generally respectful and interesting i think

 

Harsh maybe, but I don't like the word bully. The guy was consistently negative, pedantic and patronising toward me. Recently I called him out on it and got an avalanche of criticism, bitterness and resentment from him. When somebody who doesn't contribute much knowledge to the forum, never shows or links to his work, or use a real name, decides to consistently tell you what you are doing wrong and never offers anything generous or constructive toward you, it begins to wear. I'm very open here about who I am, what I do and what level I'm at because I find feedback and constructive criticism very important. He was never constructive - just negative, whiny, pedantic and jealous.

 

I tried to ignore him for a long time but he regularly quoted me and it was always negative. My heart would sink every time I got an alert with his name on it. I'd say he was the "bully" if you have to use that word (just not a very good one). If he didn't like my retort to his pestering he'd accuse me of pretty far-fetched stuff and go on and on about it. I once even PM'd him to emphatically apologise for being too harsh in a retort to him - not because I thought I had been unfair but just because I wanted him to stop pestering me. I let the last spat go because I knew somebody with his temperament would get into trouble sooner or later ... and I told myself I'ld be there to cheer when he did. I was. Sorry, but I'm glad he's gone and him leaving without my involvement pretty much vindicates me I think.

 

I'm provocative and confrontational myself, but I post regularly enough here for you to decide whether you think I'm generally fair and respectful. I don't just beat up on people randomly. I genuinely thought the guy was an @$$h01e.

[Nikkor]

Look at this advertisement I just came across on photo.net

 

[mtheory]

Someone should post an image of an A7S with a #bringit hashtag...

[JawZ]

I'm an Apple employee. If there is one thing I've learned while at Apple it's this; make the greatest product YOU want to make and then markets will not just follow, they will be created. 

 

dear Canon,

 

please stop playing the market and just make the most bleeding edge product you can without crippling it in any way and the masses will follow. Don't worry if it cannibalizes your own product line...that's how product lines are defined. 

[Andrew Reid]

I'm an Apple employee. If there is one thing I've learned while at Apple it's this; make the greatest product YOU want to make and then markets will not just follow, they will be created.

​You're absolutely right.