Sony killing Canon Cinema EOS in filmmaking / Sundance documentaries

[Andrew Reid]

This is quite an eye opening chart..

https://ymcinema.com/2025/03/06/the-cameras-behind-sundance-2025-documentaries/

In the earlier days of Cinema EOS the C300 and C200 were all over the documentary filmmaking scene.

Now it is all Sony... a7 series and FX.

Has Canon mismanaged transition from Super 35mm to full frame in the cinema world?

It is beginning to look like it.

Meanwhile Panasonic are not in the chart, which is a shame as the GH1 pioneered documentary style shooting with mirrorless cameras and a large sensor, when everyone else were shooting pro ENG or camcorder small chip.

[MrSMW]

I miss the year when you could scroll through that list and read 'LUMIX S1H' and shout, "get in there son!"

Maybe one day (year) we will see LUMIX or more likely Nikon in the list...

[PPNS]

who gives a rats ass

[Django]

I think it just confirms the on-going trend that in the broadcast/videography world Sony is the leader with Canon still present but trailing behind. Panny, Nikon & Fuji are so far behind they're basically absent although that could potentially shift in years to come.

I've noticed the Sony dominance within my own local docu/concert/event scene. Its to the point where if you don't show up with Sony gear, people look at you funny. If you want work in that scene you basically just gotta be a Sony operator. I'm not sure how to explain it other than Sony FX ecosystem is really popular and yeah they have a head start with a FF range from A7 to FX3 to FX9. Also the A7S3/FX3/FX6 sensor is a lowlight champ with super low rolling shutter which helps a lot for run & gun docu style work.

Also S-Log3 is kind of the standard in production houses. C-log is acceptable too. Other log formats can be problematic to hand in. For example I haven't even figured out how to expose/grade Nlog correctly so it would be complicated to send N-log footage to a post unit not familiar with it. Might sound silly but its workflow stuff like that that can dictate a brand/format choice from another.. and part of why ARRI dominates the cine world.

[eatstoomuchjam]

I'm surprised to see Komodo in there at all!  It's far from the camera I'd reach for if shooting a documentary!

Though I suppose not all of them are run-n-gun so maybe it was used for them.

[Andrew Reid]

The C300 form factor is obsolete, too big and clunky when you want to be discrete and mobile.

Cinema EOS is also being hampered by RF mount. Not enough choice in video orientated lenses at all the price brackets.

[ND64]

So despite super35 being better choice for documentaries, they go full frame because they use convenient zoom lenses that are slow, and need the low light performance of low res full frame sensors, and only Sony offers that in several form factors. Did I get it right? 

[ntblowz]

No body comment on the Gopro?  Maybe I should have use Gopro instead of Pana for the upcoming docu I m shooting 

[newfoundmass]

The decline in Canon's cinema lineup started a while ago. It took them too long to release a 4K successor to the C100, and what they have released are too expensive. I mean, the C70 was $4500 on release which is a lot when you compare it to what else was out there in that price range.

Before that your options were the C300 mk III ($9,000) and C500 mk II ($11,000). That's a lot of money when Sony had cheaper options.

I know so few people shooting video on Canon these days, and those that do are mostly in corporate work. I'm actually surprised that many films used Canon cameras.

 

[Andrew Reid]

They had the C200 but it didn't really go anywhere.

[mercer]

Anecdotal evidence only, but at the trade shows I've worked, the majority of cameras I've seen are Canon cinema cameras. The C100 is still used a ton. Followed by Canon mirrorless and then Sony cameras.m and that's pretty much it. I did see an Ursa once but that was for a specialty attraction where attendees could stand in front of the camera and do some kinda green screen thing.

Most of these lists are really only showing what people were using 1-3 years ago and isn't indicative of any current trends. I remember the list a couple years ago had a film that was shot on a 7D.

That said, if I was going to shoot docs professionally, I'm sure it would come down to using either a C70/C80 or a Sony FX6.

I've been thinking about my next camera purchase, and it was originally going to be between Canon and Sony but after some thought, I think it's going to either be Canon or Nikon. I must admit that the Red acquisition and Nikon's current line up of cameras... specifically the Z6iii... has gotten me more interested in Nikon.

[Andrew Reid]

I don't think a tradeshow video will be troubling Sundance.

[mercer]

Sorry my reply was to this comment by @newfoundmass

"I know so few people shooting video on Canon these days, and those that do are mostly in corporate work. I'm actually surprised that many films used Canon cameras."

I assumed the people he knows didn't make Sundance accepted documentary films, and work on events.

[newfoundmass]

2 hours ago, mercer said:

Sorry my reply was to this comment by @newfoundmass

"I know so few people shooting video on Canon these days, and those that do are mostly in corporate work. I'm actually surprised that many films used Canon cameras."

I assumed the people he knows didn't make Sundance accepted documentary films, and work on events.

Events are my bread and butter and they are dominated by Sony. I really don't know many Canon video users outside of corporate shooters, where the C70 is a big hit with them. A friend of mine is also using C100s and I got to use them again recently, which reminded me how much I loved that camera and wanted to get one so bad for the longest time! But here, at least in the northeast, Sony really has taken over from my experience.

Meanwhile I'm over here trying to do all of it with my Lumix cameras! Haha!

[fuzzynormal]

FWIW, our latest doc used:

GH5, GH4, iPhone, Xiaomi ultra 12s, Fuji X-pro2, Fuji XT5, Oly EM1mII, Oly EM10iii, DJI Mavic, GoPro, 5DII.  Wanna guess which one shot the most?  Which lenses were used?

I can tell you, but, "eh."

The film got made and it looks nice enough to us.  Still, docs like ours have no shot at Sundance.  The reason why it can not be considered for something like Sundance has nothing to do with equipment.  If our latest doc had a better story at its core, then maybe... but it doesn't.  It's just not that interesting or entertaining enough. 

With docs, my opinion is that you can shoot with anything that makes an image.  If the story is awesome and rousing it'll get seen and lauded even if the technical quality is mediocre.  Nice to have both great story AND IQ -- but story telling...camera can't only help so much in that regard, and that sort of help is really, well, not all that much anyway.

[IronFilm]

9 hours ago, Django said:

I think it just confirms the on-going trend that in the broadcast/videography world Sony is the leader with Canon still present but trailing behind. Panny, Nikon & Fuji are so far behind they're basically absent although that could potentially shift in years to come.

I've noticed the Sony dominance within my own local docu/concert/event scene. Its to the point where if you don't show up with Sony gear, people look at you funny. If you want work in that scene you basically just gotta be a Sony operator. I'm not sure how to explain it other than Sony FX ecosystem is really popular and yeah they have a head start with a FF range from A7 to FX3 to FX9. Also the A7S3/FX3/FX6 sensor is a lowlight champ with super low rolling shutter which helps a lot for run & gun docu style work.

Exactly. This chart is no surprise to me whatsoever. I've been saying for years on EOSHD that Sony is dominating in the low / mid budget professional market. (with some exceptions for particular niches or parts of the world)

Basically ages ago then C300mk1 dominated the low / mid budget professional market (with the C100 mk1 / mk2 or even the 5D mk2/mk3 or similar being the even cheaper options people would do if a C300mk1 was out of reach). 

The Sony FS700 struggled to be as popular for various reasons, really only finding a thriving niche as being the #1 go to option for low budget slow motion shoots. (is why I'd even sometimes see both a FS700 and a C300 on a shoot, with the bulk being on a C300 but some specialist shots with the FS700). 

Plus there was the Sony PMW-F3, a fantastic camera, but in pure sales number it just couldn't compete against the much cheaper C300mk1. Or the cheap FS100, likewise when the street price of the FS100 and C100 are so close together, then almost nobody is going to be choosing the FS100 over the C100mk1! (although by mid 2010's Sony had aggressively dropped the street price of the FS100)

So Canon really had a lock on the low/mid budget market. (although yeah, the C500mk1 was a bit of a failure to truly launch, ditto the C700 at the end of the 2010's)

But once the Sony FS7 launched in the mid 2010's then it was almost "game over" for Canon, as the FS7 was so very far ahead of the competition, it wasn't even close.

By the time the C300mk2 was released the FS7 already had a substantial lead, but perhaps Canon's huge market presence with the C300mk1/C100 means it could have caught up? But the C300mk2 was priced quite a bit higher than the FS7, and it just wasn't beating the FS7 in specs by enough to justify its price (heck, in some ways the FS7 was better than the C300mk2. Such as Sony still remained the best option for slow motion). The C300mk2 simply couldn't overcome both the  early lead the FS7 had built up and it's handicap of being double the price! wtf

Eventually Canon did bring down the price down by a lot to be kinda closer to the FS7, but by then it was too little, too late. 

And as more time went by, Sony just further fleshed out their ecosystem, with the FS5 (a cut down FS7, not perfect, but a very reasonable Sony alternative for the C100 crowd), the a7S series, and even the VENICE above it on the higher end. 

What was Canon doing? The C700 was a flop. C500mk2 came out very late in this product cycle (more like a FX9 competitor? Kinda, they both launched roughly at the same time). The C200? An interesting but kinda flawed product (no TC?? No 10bit 4K???). & Canon didn't have a response to the a7S series during this time period either. 

It's no surprise that Sony so dominantly ran away with the low/mid budget professional market. 

Eventually in the 2020's then Canon came out with quite nice cameras like the C300mk3/C400/C70/C80/R5C, but after giving away most of the 2010's to Sony to do as they wish, it's a nearly impossible uphill battle on their hands that Canon has. 

[ntblowz]

26 minutes ago, IronFilm said:

By the time the C300mk2 was released the FS7 already had a substantial lead, but perhaps Canon's huge market presence with the C300mk1/C100 means it could have caught up? But the C300mk2 was priced quite a bit higher than the FS7, and it just wasn't beating the FS7 in specs by enough to justify its price (heck, in some ways the FS7 was better than the C300mk2. Such as Sony still remained the best option for slow motion). The C300mk2 simply couldn't overcome both the  early lead the FS7 had built up and it's handicap of being double the price! wtf

 

Having no 4K60P really killed C300MK2, its pretty much DOA

Same for C200 with no 10bit and TC, dumb move

C100 MK II have no 4K, that is really start of the fall

 

It was around that time I got the FS5/A7S/A7RII, a really nice set for slow mo/4K/AF and keep size reasonable small... while if you go Canon most of them only have 1080P except 1DC

[IronFilm]

9 hours ago, Django said:

Also S-Log3 is kind of the standard in production houses. C-log is acceptable too. Other log formats can be problematic to hand in.

I wonder if Panasonic's collaboration with ARRI means we'll see a resurgence in popularity in Panasonic mirrorless being used. 

It's a smart move by both Panasonic and ARRI. For obvious reasons by Panasonic, but it helps out ARRI too. 

At the moment it's too easy to go with VENICE as your A Cam, and be able to use FX6/FX3/FX30 cameras as chash cams, or even a B Cam. Or if you need to go do a week of pick up shots, but you're running out of budget, it's no big deal to use a FX9/FX6 instead, or even slum it with a FX3/FX30.

Does ARRI have these easy options?  Not really. If you've been shooting with an ARRI 35 then what is your crash cam? Or a B Cam on the cheap? Ok, you might say "BMD Pyxis" or whatever, but that then introduces new workflow hassles you have to be careful about. It's not quite as seamless as Sony's ecosystem. 

What if you need to run out of funds and need to do pick up shots for a week, what will you use? Get an old ARRI Alexa Classic on the cheap? But that requires a fairly substantial supporting crew... if only you'd shot on a VENICE you could now be grabbing quickly the shots on a FX6!

Thanks to the ARRI / Panasonic collaboration then a lot more people will be seriously thinking about Panasonic for crash cams / C cams / etc, and feeling more confident in shooting on ARRI on a shoestring budget knowing it will be relatively seamlessly easy to do pick up shots on a Panasonic if the worst happens and they run out of funds. 

Also for ultra low budget shoots, where you think you might be doing post in house, thus it could be argued "it doesn't matter" what camera you are shooting with, as whatever quirks the workflow has then you have the dedication to iron out the kinks, but....  what if you have hopes and aspirations that maybe you'll get an injection of funds so you can the finishing touches done by a proper Post House? It's going to be a lot easier if only you'd gone with say a Sony FX6/FX3/FX30 than if you were using a Nikon Z6mk2 / Fujifilm X-T3 / Panasonic S1H / whatever. 

So likewise they might now be giving more serious consideration to say a Panasonic GH7 over a FX3/FX30. 

[Django]

I think a big part of why Canon lost to Sony in the low/mid segment is the change of mount & lenses. 

Canon were super slow to update their cine line to RF and still have this problem were only C70/C80 are RF and the rest is EF. On the Sony side its just E-mount through & through for over a decade. This consistency makes it a lot stronger to build and invest in the ecosystem. Not to mention RF mount has almost no S35 lenses and is closed to third-parties. That whole strategy just backfired on them big time imo. I still like Canon cameras and lenses but it's a much weaker ecosystem than Sony. 

Now Nikon have a chance to enter this market with Z-mount RED/Nikon cine line. Fuji are attempting with the Eterna but I feel that's going to flop, should have gone with a Fuji X APS-c sensor like the one inside XH2S.

[Ninpo33]

One things no one has mentioned yet is Autofocus. FX6 and a couple of FX3’s make a pretty solid doc package on the cheap and might be able to eliminate 1-2 crew members/operators if depending on AF for talking heads and run and gun stuff. I’ve missed a few big shots on the GH5 on interviews using manual lenses. I was in a contrasty low light situation and thought I was ok with the focus range to be able to lock off a second angle on he GH5. I didn’t notice that the talent had adjusted their chair forward and about 20 min into the interview I looked over to see a soft image on the monitor and cursed myself for missing it. That would have surely been saved with Sony AF on the FX3. Same with AF for gimbal work replacing more expensive steady cam stuff with a 2nd AC operating a FIZ. 

The FX6 can be built up into a good looking full size camera to impress clients meanwhile the small size of the FX3’s can be used like @IronFilm mentioned as crash cams or car mounted stuff. Good rolling shutter and low light performance along with small travel bags for airplanes makes it all a pretty solid setup.