Personal View site logo
Cinema gear deals, direct from factories - Gear deals and Gear deals section. Also check Cameras, lenses, software, gear deals.
You support is vital for us. To keep this place ad free and independent, select one of the options below.
Donations are going to laboratory, support costs, hosting, etc. Your support allows to improve and expand this site.
Canon Cinema 1D, rocking 4K camera
  • image

    • Internal 4K recording, 4:2:2
    • MJPEG compression (8 bit, of course)
    • ISO up to 25,600
    • HDMI connector (Full HD, 4:2:2)
    • Canon Log Gamma
    • 4K only for 24p
    • 24p, 25p, 30p, 50p and 60p in 1080p
    • Fullframe and two crop options - APS-H, Super 35mm

    The battle of 4k and RAW begins.

    Info from - http://www.cinemaeos.usa.canon.com/products.php?type=Cameras


    Available at:


    canon_eos.jpg
    800 x 229 - 35K
  • 57 Replies sorted by
  • 4k for 15k - NO-WAY!

  • And Canon continues to waist the lead they fell into with the 5D Mark II. Look for Sony, Panny, and everyone else to clean up shop this year.

  • It seems like an odd price point for this camera, close to RED territory. What surprises me is no focus assist, and probably no waveform monitoring .I guess Canon believe this will always be used with an external EVF or monitor with such trifles, and a full rig. The clean HDMI output is nice I guess, with full 4:2:2 -- but I think this large sensor size is going to keep focus pullers in full-time employment for a few more years, as every DP will keep trying to maintain insane DOF.

    http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/04/12/Canon-EOS-1D-C-4K-capable-DSLR

  • A 9k$ premium for basically a 1Dx with different firmware. Expect a 5Dc to come out soon, that will be your 10K$ camera

  • I hope the Canon worshipers are happy. The C300 price was already outrageous, now this is at another level. Now I can understand that for certain pro's this will be a good camera but what is terrible is that Canon just dishes their own customer. They have no respect for those guys that made them what they are now in the video large sensor camera market. They just rode on their back and gained a certain aura in this market, to just dish those guys. I don't see the 5d3 as a real successor to the 4 year 5d2 in video. So if they want to still use their lens etc on Canon they have no other alternative than invest $ 15 000k, perhaps it might be lower to lets say 12k about 4 times the price of the original 5d3.

  • @last_SHIFT Yes, they could not even put some more video features. Just bundle the 1dx with a new firmware!!!

  • I must say i will never ever in this life pay $15,000 for 4:2:0 8bits full HD to CF card, and uncompressed fullHD 4:2:2 8bits HDMI, without 4k uncompressed output. THIS IS ABSOLUTE MARKETING. NO GOOD CAMERA HERE, let alone all DSLR weeknesess.

    http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/about_canon?type=news&maxRowCount=10&fileURL=selected&dojo.preventCache=1334239879592&pageKeyCode=pressreldetail&docId=0901e02480533ee2#

    I can work better with half that money, 4k is exaggerated unless you do some very professional stuff and if that is the case you wont use a 15k DSLR with 4k 8bit compressed you will use a 70K F65 or RED EPIC 12 bits 4:4:4 uncompressed 4k because professional means budget, so this does't worth the price, if someone already got 2k (fullhd scalled works perfectly) into big high quality movie theater you realize is more than enough.

    Canon just get this out to try to be competitive and play the game but to be honest they aren't doing things right, this camera will have some months of live, then when Panasonic or Sony release some cheap and much better 4k camera this will be like a Canon XLHD that cost aroud $8000 and than sony and panasonic got z1 and panasonic got the p2 in the $5000 price range and Canon died until they came up with some cheap hdv.

    Same History here wait and see

  • @leonbeas

    Your statement about 4:2:0 seems incorrect.

    As for 4K, you can view on it as 1080p 4:4:4 intraframe camera if you like :-)

    I think Canon is right, as they have good potential with this camera, it has good build quality.
    And the price... it'll drop with time.

  • It seems like an odd price-point relative to the C500. How many people are ready to spend $15,000 on a camera but willing to sacrifice all the extra features from the one at $25,000?

    Of course, I am ignoring the issue of a full-frame vs Super35mm sensor, but it does seem like offering the C500 in two configurations (Super35mm and full-frame) would have made more sense than the compromise here for $15,000.

    But, there are still some things that interest me about it (though some very frustrating limitations as well).

    Now, as for the good part:

    • This camera should (if stills performance is any indication) have the best low-light performance of any 4k camera to date.
    • It delivers 4:2:2 internally (which is what a lot of people asked for) without the need for more expensive media. (EDIT: At least for 4K, though frustratingly not for Full HD).
    • It is the first 4k camera released outside RED that supports full-frame lens use. (EDIT: If the following link is accurate, it may be that there is a crop applied in 4K video mode but not in 1080P http://www.eoshd.com/content/7876/canon-cinema-1d-4k-dslr-officially-announced)

    http://www.cinemaeos.usa.canon.com/products.php?type=Camera-1DC

    EDIT:@leonbeas So you were right about Full HD. I should read more carefully - I did not notice that the additional information had been introduced in your new link. Mea culpa. http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/about_canon?type=news&maxRowCount=10&fileURL=selected&dojo.preventCache=1334239879592&pageKeyCode=pressreldetail&docId=0901e02480533ee2#

  • Yeah It seems to me that Canon should have up it to 12 bits 4:4:4 and then upped the priced to 18k/19k . From a marketing perspective the price vs features doesn't make much sense. Its too expensive to be pro-sumer and too cheap (sans critical needs) to be pro . Full frame would be nice though....that's my biggest gripe on the GH2 lens wise.

  • Nonetheless, as others pointed out: no RAW workflow? Why?

    EDIT:

    • No articulating screen.
    • Screen has a 3:2 aspect ratio.

    Overall, the C500 seems a lot more exciting, unless there is a very noticeable advantage in high ISO video performance for this model.

    @No_SuRReNDer Well said.

  • You also ignore the fact that it could be that only difference to 1Dx is firmware :-)

  • Where is the pricing info at? I don't see it anywhere on those links?

  • @Vitaliy_Kiselev What about the new design on the front? That big red C might cost a lot of money. ;)

    @bwhitz It is right before "About Canon U.S.A., Inc." in the link @leonbeas provided for the Cinema 1D.

  • About APS-H crop in 4K mode.

    1Dx sensor is 5184 × 3456, so crop is absolutely natural to have 4K horizontal pixels.

  • In post even Avid seems to have seen the light - hardware less so!

  • Vitaly the info i posted is based on the canon oficial launch page.

    c500.jpg
    544 x 61 - 48K
  • I think this is a fun time for us. The competition for true cinema quality 1080p and 4K cameras is immense. Remember we are yet to see the new 7D, or beloved GH-3. I think $15k is way too much for this camera. That Sony 700 @ $8k is a sweet spot for a pro quality 4k, with some bonus high speed shooting. Give us at least 10-bit. i can see banding in 8-bit. But I really doubt I could see the difference between a 10, 12 or 16 bit image.

    I wonder why no one is offering 2.5K? It would give extra space to reframe, image stabilize in post, and 2.5k can be viewed right now on most imacs. As far as I know, no one really has a 4k TV or monitor yet, except for high-end post houses.

  • @DisneyToy Don't forget that 4K is only listed as a future upgrade for the Sony. It is quite likely that they will charge for it, like they did with their log mode on one of their other cameras recently. And the price for that upgrade and the external recorder it seems likely to require at this point is unknown - it could meet or exceed that $15,000 price, though it seems likely to be lower.

    As far as 2.5K, it is not sexy to market. HD, 2K and 4K all have marketing sex appeal. 2.5K sounds like an engineering term, and makes people wonder why they don't spring for 4K. :)

  • Sorry boys I may be speaking from ground zero - but 2k 4k who gives a flying fuck - if you're talking about film - you're not on this forum alone .. sorry :/ It isn't a game - it's not a job centre - it's not a festival of uber cock - the thing I love about this lot, and being here for years is - u have an uber forum of real pros, hackers, sound, picture, all of it what a joy - get on with it - work hard - be good, make your job - may be presumtious but I'm sure a lot of my compatriots who, like me made a lot of fucking amazing tea, wouldn't want you to miss that skill - came in handy for me today lol:) There's no shortcut - tech or talent - gotta put in the hours - get on with it - fkin ell its fun nowadays! /hats off to VK and Nick moved a hell of a lot of people to make good stuff love it x

  • So 4 years ago we got a camera that did 1080p 30fps 4:2:0 H264 video for $2500. Today for $2500 I can get...practically the exact same thing. 4 years and every "upgrade" means an upgrade in cost as well. Everyone has a price bracket and guaranteed people will buy items in that price bracket if something NEW is offered (ex. new iphone every year, same price, new features).

  • Moores law anyone?

  • @Xenocide38 I see what you mean, but only up to a point. The difference is a lot bigger at the price points right above and below it, including 1080p 60fps from Sony at close to half that price, or the GH2 at a 1/3 to 1/4 of the price. And for a little above $2500 the ISO performance has drastically improved (and for a little more than that you have the FS100).

    The biggest differences during that time frame have been seen in the $500-1,500 bracket and the $4,000-10,000 as opposed to the space between them.

  • @ahbleza When I open that page, the video on it says ""the creator of this video has not given you permission to embed it on this domain" and I cannot play it. Is anyone else having that issue?