Macintosh Sauce: Too bad it will probably have the same crappy metal/plastic E-mount. :/
That mount is all metal like A7s, unlike A7 and A7r. You can see that from the image
Staxxx: The new zoom lens with this camera sounds like a good compliment for my RX1. Looks like I'm Sony all the way now....
The announced zoom lens is for A-mount -- not E-mount.
RichRMA: The first of its kind? How does it differ from the Olympus 5-axis unit?
It's Full-Fame mirrorless with IBIS. That makes it first
dmartin92: So it's probably a waste to get 4K if you don't have a 4K television ? That's my question.
SmilerGrogan, big difference between shooting movies in 5K and editing and releasing them in 4K. Movies are released as 2K. Given it takes millions of dollars to edit these movies, they won't redo them as 4K even if they have 5K unedited footage.
Red has been bragging about their 4K cameras for past 6 years, but I think at best one or 2 movies shot by Red were rekeased as 4K. I don't think any movie in 2014 so far has been released as 4K. If you know any, let us know, but I doubt it's more than one, if any.
Almost all Hollywood movies are released as 2K.. The 4K theaters just play the upscaled 2K movies.
Given it will cost billions of dollars to upgrade all theaters in large markets like India and China to 4K, don't hold your breadth. Holywood will continue to master/release movies in 2K, as they have been doing so far
Joe Ogiba: "Wow, it's amazing how clueless some people are. There are thousands of 4K theaters worldwide. "
These 4K theaters play 2K movies upscaled to 4K. There are no movies that are released in 4K, because there are millions of theaters all over the world that are 2K -- not 4K
No movie in 2014 was released in 4K, even if shot on 4K cameras. Hollywood movies are are edited/mastered in 2K and released as 2K. 4K theaters just upscale the 2K movies.
What 4K theaters? There are no 4K theaters in some of the world largest markets, like India with Bollywood movies.
In fact, no Hollywood movie in 2014 was released in 4K; even if shot on 4K camera, movies are edited and released in 2K.
SmilerGrogan: How are we all so sure that this is going to be such a rotten camera? I've shot with the C100 and the pictures I've created are pretty stellar.
BBC will sometime even except IPhone footage from it's journalists
I wasn't defending Canon until I saw you exaggerating about how bad "AVCHD" is like a moronic idiot. FS700 and C100 both AVCHD cameras have been used to shoot tons of music and commercials and weddings.
Stop exaggerating like a moron
Not with "external" recorders. There is no recorder on C100 that is being used to shoot documentary for CNN
Stop posting exaggerated lies about AVCHD. It might be bit outdated, but it has been used to shoot tons of commercials and weddings.
C100 is a pretty popular camera, and I have not doubt Canon will sell plenty of C100 Mark II
Doesn't matter. AVCHD can be edited just fine, and given C100 has been used to shoot bazillion of commercials & music videos is a proof of that.
You are now exaggerating BarnET. No, it's not impossible to edit/grade AvcHD footage.
C100 and FS700, both AVCHD, have been used to shoot tons of commercials and documentaries. So was unhacked GH3 (again it was ACCHD). Philip Bloom is currently using F55 to shoot a documentary for CNN, and one of the B camera used by producer is C100.
Stop exaggerating. Yes, Canon should have upgraded the codec primarily due to what competition offers, but there is no reason to doubt that C100 MarkII will be used by many professionals, just like C100 and C300 are being used already.
These are very popular cameras, indeed with low budget independent professionals, these have been #1 most popular rented cameras of 2014 so far, and will continue to be that way until Canon upgrades C300
Sdaniella: lol.too many folks confuse needs differ between Cinematography and regular videographye.g. the look of AF, wobbly like Pany GH4/GH3, no AF in 4k (GH4), or fast AF in sports (dSLRs, EOS 7DMkII), or smooth-n-slow pull focus as in Cine (EOS 70D) or fast smooth 'no wobble' AF in Cine/videography (EOS 70D), etc
e.g.Autofocus Comparison - Canon EOS 70D vs Panasonic GH4EunJae Imhttp://vimeo.com/96882002"Yes, I think both are working well. I just try AF Mode (49-Area & Custom Multi) on GH4 and it was bit more faster then 1-Area (center). BTW, AF is almost useless at 4K mode." - EunJae Im
Pany's AF in both GH4/GH3 is 'wobbly', unfit for serious Cine, but fine for regular videographers/handicamers where Cine-centric smooth speed-customizable focus pull matters, as would be the case for EOS Cine C-series users, or even 70D Cine users with smooth 'no wobble' Touch AF or AF racking
Sdaniella, FS700 is not small sensor camera. It's super 35mm like Canon C100.
FS700, FS100, and the newest FS7 all have AF with E-mount lenses, and they have PDAF AF with A mount lenses when using SLT adapter. These are not small sensor cameras.
FS7 is only $2000 more than C100 Mark II but check the specs. It does 60 fps 4K internal recording. Upto 180 fps full HD, and upto 240 fps raw with external recorder.
It does 10-bit XAVC internally and it can do 12 bit ProRes with external recorder
Just a Photographer: I thought this format is as dead as a dodo.
The only camera that uses this format is the D4.
Memorystick work on all Sony cameras and PS portable, even today, including the newest cameras like A7s. My desktop memory reader reads them. Weird definition of "failure".
atrac ia audio compression, software algorithm, not a hardware that anyone bought. Maybe you will proclaim next that AVCHD was a failure as now it's replaced with XAVC.
All the rest of tape and optical format maybe dead now, just as VHS is dead now. They were replaced by DVD and then Blu-ray. They all will be replaced too with online streaming.
Big Fing deal. Welcome to ever changing world. Are you still using VHS tapes and 3.5" disks in your computer (that was Sony format too) , luddite?
Scottelly: If I were a camera company I would stick with SD cards and go with UHS-II. Those things are FAST! If you have a D4 or a D4s though . . . I guess a couple of those ridiculously expensive 64 GB QXD cards might make sense. For now though, I think I'm going to stick with much slower but more universal and compatible cards, like this: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/945286-REG/sandisk_sdsdqx_064g_a46a_64gb_extreme_micro_sdxc_uhs_1.html
What kind of post is that? People will buy a card that can be used in their camera. D4 can't use SD card. Why on earth D4 owners buy SD card?
Yeah, "Failed Formats" like Blu-ray Disc.
Mike_V: These are for the FS7
FS7 doesn't really need G series as S series is fast enough (max data rate on FS7 is 600 Mbits / second). S series are cheaper.
Factory modified F5 and F55 also can also use XQD cards. Max data rate on those is also 600 mbits/s
Arri Alexa uses Sony's SxS cards which is even more expensive than XQD. They would have used XQD if it was available back in 2010
sam james. " beautiful image quality"
That's pretty subjective. Doesn't change the fact that codec on the camera is consumer level.
"nobody could for Cine, because AF was never available before EOS C"
This isn't true. FS700 has AF. It also has very fast PDAF AF with SLT adapter. AF is just not used by professional videographers.
hippo84: Why does A77II has the same ISO, shutter speed and aperture as shots from 7D and other non-transluscend mirror cameras? Wasn't shots from A77II darker and then corrected?
So where is A77 II review?
JJ Rodin: What is it with Sony fanboys and xavc/-s codec fetish ?
The xavc codec/definition is a Sony specific spec. Why would Canon or Nikon or ARRI or any other maker necessarily use xavc/-s or even want to use it ?
I am not saying the codec is good or bad (as compared to which other?), but Sony guys, there are oodles of codecs at least equal codecs to Sony's, I suspect pros would not touch xavc-s or whatever (ProRes 444 or 422 better?) - much better codecs - does an ARRI alexa 65 use xavc codecs - NOPE!
Of course the pro cams (which this is a low end model) should offer multiple codecs beyond RAW - not likely xavc me thinks.
If you read PhilipBloom and other pro blogs, a lot of them (vast majority) don't even like raw. Too much disk space (costs add up), too much work in post editing and encoding.
So raw is not the answer for many people. Even TV dramas shot on Alexa are mostly shot in ProRes, not raw.
Also, C100 Mark II can't shoot raw, not even with external recorder. It does 8-bit uncompressed video to external recorder, but that isn't raw.Yes that can be converted to other formats, but don't call it raw. It's 8-bit uncompressed video.
raw is pure sensor data before debayering and it's usually 12 bit or higher.