Canon C80 coming soon

[ntblowz]

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DG9C6CR9

 

Basically C400 sensor in C70 body

[Mmmbeats]

Makes sense if you are a C400 owner looking for a companion cam.

But otherwise the C70 is going to be a better camera in my view.  The DGO sensor is magnificent.

I'm planning to pair the C400 with my existing C70, which will create matching issues (sharpness, sensor size), but will give me a lot of flexibility.  

[herein2020]

We all knew that was coming, the triple base ISO is going to be a big advantage over the C70 so if you shoot in low light a lot the C80 will be the better option. The C80 will also fix the soft image out of the C70, although it can be sharpened in post, the image straight out of camera in the C70 has always been soft, also no more speed booster needed to get back the stop of light lost due to the S35 sensor.

The C80 would make a nice A cam to my C70 as a B cam instead of me using the R7 or R5II, but I don't shoot enough long form content to justify it. Maybe in a few years I will pick up a used one.

 

[Mmmbeats]

33 minutes ago, herein2020 said:

We all knew that was coming, the triple base ISO is going to be a big advantage over the C70 so if you shoot in low light a lot the C80 will be the better option. The C80 will also fix the soft image out of the C70, although it can be sharpened in post, the image straight out of camera in the C70 has always been soft, also no more speed booster needed to get back the stop of light lost due to the S35 sensor.

The C80 would make a nice A cam to my C70 as a B cam instead of me using the R7 or R5II, but I don't shoot enough long form content to justify it. Maybe in a few years I will pick up a used one.

 

I'm pretty dubious about all of that!

I'm not so sure about the low light 'big advantage'.  Yes, the 12,800 ISO base is going to be a fantastic feature, but the C70 is already a fantastic camera in low light because of the rich inky blacks you get with DGO.  You're essentially getting an additional exposure at the shadow level and (with the great dynamic range) you get fantastic low-light imagery.  This was actually a key factor that made me buy the camera in the first place.
I film in subterranean poorly-lit locations with the C70 all the time, and it is brilliant for those kind of scenarios.  Unlike the cameras that have to crank up ISO (like the A7S derived Sonys) you get great highlight control alongside rich shadows.
The C400 (albeit pre-production at this stage) looks noisy and thin by comparison.
Also - when do you ever actually shoot at 12,800 ISO?  Like I say, I shoot in dark spaces very often, but never require that kind of facility.  Don't get me wrong - it's a nice feature to have, and might come in handy here and there.  But it isn't a key feature in my books, almost always makes things look unnatural, and you are going to be better off with DGO in most situations.

I'm talking here as someone who is likely to buy the C400 and is excited by it, so I'm not trying to rubbish the sensor tech and implimentation (which is the same as the C80). 

C70 is soft by design, just like many high-end cinema cameras.  Its a point of preference really, and not something that needs to 'fixed' in my view.  I'm looking forward to being able to choose between softer (doc and fiction) and sharper (corporate / client work).

You don't lose a stop of light between sensor sizes.  Speedboosters work in a unique way to refocus light, which is where the stop gain comes from.  

I notice that the C80 has SDI though - that is another differentiator from the C70 (HDMI only).

[eatstoomuchjam]

Smart move by Canon (if not unexpected) since it's a lot more affordable for a lot of people than the C400 and it's not a huge premium over an R5 II.

Hopefully they fixed the monitor hinge and there will be a first-party EVF.

As others have pointed out, for people who love the DGO sensor (including me), this is likely to be an additional camera vs a replacement.  Could slow initial adoption by quite a bit.

[Mmmbeats]

Full video here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sGYQQgybiXk

[ac6000cw]

...and the dpreview news item: https://www.dpreview.com/news/9525732938/canon-announces-the-eos-c80-cinema-camera

[independent]

Shit. This is the one. 

[Davide DB]

 

 

[herein2020]

3 hours ago, Mmmbeats said:

I'm pretty dubious about all of that!

I'm not so sure about the low light 'big advantage'.  Yes, the 12,800 ISO base is going to be a fantastic feature, but the C70 is already a fantastic camera in low light because of the rich inky blacks you get with DGO.  You're essentially getting an additional exposure at the shadow level and (with the great dynamic range) you get fantastic low-light imagery.  This was actually a key factor that made me buy the camera in the first place.

To me it still seems pretty noisy around 4000ISO, a second native ISO at 4000 would be nice, I have never filmed somewhere where 12,800 is necessary, but definitely 4000ISO is pretty common and to me it gets noisy. When I can crush the blacks in that scenario it is fine, but when I need 4000ISO just to properly expose skin tones then it is definitely noisier than say the R5II at 4000ISO.

3 hours ago, Mmmbeats said:

C70 is soft by design, just like many high-end cinema cameras.  Its a point of preference really, and not something that needs to 'fixed' in my view.  I'm looking forward to being able to choose between softer (doc and fiction) and sharper (corporate / client work).

I know it's been stated that it is soft by design, but it is the softest camera that I have ever owned; softer than the C200, S5, R5, R7, etc.  I have gotten used to sharpening in post, but it's still a little disconcerting to almost look out of focus prior to post processing. 

3 hours ago, Mmmbeats said:

You don't lose a stop of light between sensor sizes.  Speedboosters work in a unique way to refocus light, which is where the stop gain comes from.  

All I can tell you is that identical lenses pointed at the same source and the R7 is a stop under exposed vs the R5 every time. To expose them the same I have to do something (ISO, Aperture, Shutter speed) to the R7 to match the exposure of the R5. The C70 with the speedbooster beside the R7 has the same problem.

1 hour ago, Davide DB said:

 

All this video did was make me appreciate the C70 even more and made it apparent that the C400 does not have IBIS. The handheld footage was hard to watch. I did like how sharp it was straight out of camera (assuming they did not add sharpness), but it is definitely not a run and gun camera without a gimbal or tripod.

I know...cinema cameras don't need IBIS, but I think if it had it, and they had a way of locking it in place when you did not want it enabled, that would make it a truly killer run and gun cinema camera. It's small size already makes it a good fit for gimbals, but no IBIS makes it a hard sell for handholding. Maybe the digital IS works better than most prior digital IS, but I doubt it.

The image quality, other than sharpness, did not really look any better to me than the C70 with its DGO sensor. I think today, if you did not already own the C70, the C400 might be the way to go, but I don't think buying it to replace the C70 makes sense considering how good the C70 is.

[Davide DB]

I was watching one of Canon's promotional videos and related BTS, and I was reflecting that Canon has always been very good at choosing its advertising materials. Its promotional videos are never dull.
In contrast, the Panasonic/Lumix promotional videos are on average terrible, and in general Lumix's marketing strategy is terrible.  I remember a video of the GH7 and I wanted to shoot myself in the balls because of how clichéd it was.
Of course I am talking about the artistic and communicative choices that are independent of the quality of the advertised product.

 

 

 

 

 

[herein2020]

9 minutes ago, Davide DB said:

I was watching one of Canon's promotional videos and related BTS, and I was reflecting that Canon has always been very good at choosing its advertising materials. Its promotional videos are never dull.
In contrast, the Panasonic/Lumix promotional videos are on average terrible, and in general Lumix's marketing strategy is terrible.  I remember a video of the GH7 and I wanted to shoot myself in the balls because of how clichéd it was.
Of course I am talking about the artistic and communicative choices that are independent of the quality of the advertised product.

 

 

 

Definitely a better representation of the C80 vs CVP's sample footage.  The white hot sunlight on the floor does a good job showcasing the DR and highlight rolloff.  The Lotus Helix Jr gimbal did a good job stabilizing it and showcasing how small of a setup that you can use to combine a gimbal with the C80. 

I would be curious to see how the C70 would perform in the same venue.

[MrSMW]

1 hour ago, herein2020 said:

It's small size already makes it a good fit for gimbals, but no IBIS makes it a hard sell for handholding

Which was the deal-breaker for me with the C70 and would be with this C70 and towards the end of last year, I was seriously looking at switching to Canon for the; 28-70 f2, 28-105 f2.8 and 70-200 f4, plus an R3 for stills/hybrid.

Having said that, the C70 was probably a bit overkill for my needs anyway and I would probably have been better with a pair of R3's and an R6ii, but it didn't happen anyway so...

C80 looks a bit of kit though! But nah, I'm quite happy with what I have.

[herein2020]

24 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

Which was the deal-breaker for me with the C70 and would be with this C70 and towards the end of last year, I was seriously looking at switching to Canon for the; 28-70 f2, 28-105 f2.8 and 70-200 f4, plus an R3 for stills/hybrid.

Having said that, the C70 was probably a bit overkill for my needs anyway and I would probably have been better with a pair of R3's and an R6ii, but it didn't happen anyway so...

C80 looks a bit of kit though! But nah, I'm quite happy with what I have.

 

No IBIS is why I also skipped the R5C, the C70 is great for tripod work, it's nice to have an A cam that I know can run for hours, no overheating, and XLR inputs so that's what I use it for. For gimbal work it is so so if you are a solo shooter; it is right at the edge of what is reasonable for a one-handed gimbal, probably much more manageable with something like the Helix Jr.

That sounds like a seriously expensive switch, those RF lenses that you listed are pretty much some of the most expensive that you can buy for those ranges.

36 minutes ago, MrSMW said:

C80 looks a bit of kit though! But nah, I'm quite happy with what I have.

I am happy the C80 has no IBIS; without it the C70 still does everything that I need and more so Canon won't get any more of my money this year (hopefully).

[MrSMW]

39 minutes ago, herein2020 said:

That sounds like a seriously expensive switch, those RF lenses that you listed are pretty much some of the most expensive that you can buy for those ranges.

Basically what killed it.

[Mmmbeats]

3 hours ago, herein2020 said:

To me it still seems pretty noisy around 4000ISO, a second native ISO at 4000 would be nice, I have never filmed somewhere where 12,800 is necessary, but definitely 4000ISO is pretty common and to me it gets noisy. When I can crush the blacks in that scenario it is fine, but when I need 4000ISO just to properly expose skin tones then it is definitely noisier than say the R5II at 4000ISO.

I know it's been stated that it is soft by design, but it is the softest camera that I have ever owned; softer than the C200, S5, R5, R7, etc.  I have gotten used to sharpening in post, but it's still a little disconcerting to almost look out of focus prior to post processing. 

All I can tell you is that identical lenses pointed at the same source and the R7 is a stop under exposed vs the R5 every time. To expose them the same I have to do something (ISO, Aperture, Shutter speed) to the R7 to match the exposure of the R5. The C70 with the speedbooster beside the R7 has the same problem.

...

Noise experience can be very subjective because 1) people expose using different strategies, 2) cameras get pointed at different things, 3) what one person deems 'noisy' might be tolerable for someone else.  I will say - I've been fine using the C70 in the higher ISO ranges.
I think it will be interesting to see how the two sensors (with their different approaches to low-light) compare at different ISO values.  I think its going to be closer than people think (though not at 12,800 or so, obviously!).~

I do agree with you about the C70 to an extent.  I've said it myself before that it can sometimes be a bit too soft.  Thing is though, I think the speedbooster and EF lenses add to the issue with the C70.  I've been using the RF 24 - 105 a lot recently and it has really made me re-evaluate the sharpness of the C70.  Basically it responds well if you pair it with really sharp glass.

Dunno what to say about your exposure experiences between models.  There are variations in how camera systems respond to exposure standards, but there shouldn't ever be a stop deviation.  So many factors to consider though - adaptors, settings, etc.  I'm not sure what's up there.

[eatstoomuchjam]

I'll jump on the "gosh, the C70 sure gets noisy when you go above ISO 3200 or so" train.  I like mine a lot, but the noise is real.

As far as softness, I find it to be really pleasant and flattering to skin tones - and it's rare that I'm trying to count the molecules in a brick wall 100 meters away.

 

(But hey, I'm also a person who just overpaid for a used OG Dog Schidt optics flare factory so take any statements I make about liking softness with that in mind)

[herein2020]

3 hours ago, Mmmbeats said:

I do agree with you about the C70 to an extent.  I've said it myself before that it can sometimes be a bit too soft.  Thing is though, I think the speedbooster and EF lenses add to the issue with the C70.  I've been using the RF 24 - 105 a lot recently and it has really made me re-evaluate the sharpness of the C70.  Basically it responds well if you pair it with really sharp glass.

I agree with you and have thought about that many times; I mainly use the EF 24-105 F4.0 with it on top of the speedbooster, so already a somewhat soft lens combined with the speedbooster. The "fix" to both possible problems is of course the RF 24-105mm F2.8 but $3K for a lens that I will pretty much only use for long form content on the C70 which I already don't do very often is just not worth it to me.

I could literally sell the C70 and buy the C80 for less than that one lens.

[herein2020]

Here is one of the guys that I really trust for reviews, he makes a living every day as a videographer, not a YT reviewer. Funny thing is, he said almost exactly the same things that I said in this thread (C70 is almost too soft, C70 falls apart after 3200ISO, if you already have the C70 it might be all you need, etc.). Honestly, his video makes me want the C80 more than anything I have seen so far (but I'm not upgrading).

I fall squarely into the category where the C70 is more than enough for my needs but the C80 would fix everything I don't like about the C70.

 

 

[ntblowz]

If I was all on RF L lens with my FF camera then C80 definitely fit better, those FF lens is not really great on C70 due to 1.5x crop

And I really notice the sharpness when I punch in post, the R5C is way more clearer.