Previous news story    Next news story

Canon unveils EOS C500 4K cinema video camera and four lenses

By dpreview staff on Aug 29, 2012 at 12:17 GMT

Canon has officially announced the EOS C500, the professional 4K video camera output that it promised at the NAB trade show in April. A continuation of the concept of the C300, it can capture Raw 4K video footage and offers frame rates of up to 120fps in compressed 4K. It also captures 2K footage (2,048 x 1,080 pixels) at 12-bit, with 4:4:4 Y'CbCr chroma sub-sampling for high colour resolution. The company has also confirmed four cinema EOS lenses alongside it - the EF mount CN-E15.5-47mm T2.8 L S and CN-E30-105mm T2.8 L S, and the same optics in PL mount (known as the CNE15.5-47mm T2.8 L SP and CN-E30-105mm T2.8 L SP respectively). The C500's price will be in the region of $30,000.

Quality, performance and creative choice – Canon strengthens the Cinema EOS System

London, UK, 29 August 2012 – Canon today expands the Cinema EOS System with the official launch of the company’s eagerly-awaited 4K cinema camera and four compact EF Cinema Lenses. Originally unveiled as a development announcement in April 2012, the EOS C500, the CN-E15.5-47mm T2.8 L S/SP and the CN-E30-105mm T2.8 L S/SP join the new EOS C100 and ground-breaking EOS C300 in creating Canon’s strongest ever line-up, offering outstanding quality and performance in a range of different
configurations.

Canon’s Cinema EOS System brings together unique expertise from the company’s DSLR, video, broadcast and lens divisions – offering exceptional quality and creative freedom to professionals of all kinds. With the new entry-level EOS C100 and the 4K EOS C500, the system has grown to meet a range of production requirements for users of all levels. Additionally Canon’s new cine zoom lenses provide excellent value and performance in EF and PL variants – offering compatibility with virtually any camera in production today. All new products will be showcased at IBC 2012, marking the first time the complete Cinema EOS System has been displayed in Europe.

“This is our strongest-ever professional video line-up” said Kieran Magee, Professional Imaging Marketing Director, Canon Europe. “Each of these new products has been developed with the needs of professionals in mind, empowering our customers to be more creative than ever before. With the EOS C500 and our new cinema zoom lenses, as well as the new EOS C100, we’re extending the range to meet the needs of an even
wider range of users – from independent users through to cinematographers.”

EOS C500 – revolutionary 4K video capture

Following a development announcement in April 2012, Canon today confirms the European launch of the EOS C500, a new digital cinema camera capable of 4Kresolution (4,096 x 2,160 pixels) video output. Designed for motion picture and high resolution digital production industries, the EOS C500 offers the ability to output 4Kresolution images as RAW data for recording using an external device. The camera’s uncompressed 4K output also unleashes the full potential of Canon’s expanding range of 4K-resolution EF Cinema Lenses, while an EF mount with Cinema Lock makes it easier for operators to switch lenses during shooting.

As well as uncompressed 4K footage, the EOS C500 supports 12-bit or 10-bit RGB 4:4:4 output signals for 2K (2048 x 1080 pixels) or Full HD off-board recording – delivering rich colour and high compatibility with image processes such as chroma key positioning. The camera also supports frame rates up to 120p in both 4K and 2K
modes, providing enhanced creative flexibility for high-speed (slow motion) video capture. The inclusion of Canon Log Gamma delivers the high quality video and wide exposure latitude demanded by professional cinematographers.

Based on the same advanced platform as the EOS C300, the EOS C500 delivers exceptional performance, incredible mobility and outstanding expandability. The availability of a PL mount variant provides support for industry-standard lenses, while the EF mount model is the first Cinema EOS camera to feature a modified EF mount with Cinema Lock. Designed as a result of user feedback, EF mount with Cinema Lock has been developed to make it simpler to swap lenses mid-shoot. Instead of the user having to rotate the lens, the new mount rotates to lock lenses into place – providing easier operation during studio and field-based shooting.

New cinema zoom lenses – flexibility, performance and value

The arrival of four new EF Cinema Lenses expands the Cinema EOS System further, with each designed to offer premium performance, mobility and competitive pricing. Two wide-angle cinema zoom lenses, the CN-E15.5-47mm T2.8 L S (EF mount) and CNE15.5-47mm T2.8 L SP (PL mount) launch alongside two  telephoto cinema zoom lenses, the CN-E30-105mm T2.8 L S (EF) and CN-E30-105mm T2.8 L SP (PL) and all
offer sufficient resolution for 4K production, making them ideal for use with Canon’s EOS C500 and EOS-1D C cinema cameras – both of which support 4K video capture.

All four lenses offer compatibility with industry-standard Super 35 mm-equivalent cameras, while cutting-edge optical constructions provide superior flexibility for use in a wide range of situations. Each lens features a compact, lightweight body that supports a versatile focal range, making them ideal for handheld shooting, and a
variety of design enhancements made in recognition of the way users work, such as a uniform front diameter, standard gear pitch and 300 degree focus travel for precise focus adjustments. Perfectly complementing Canon’s existing Top-End Cinema zooms and EF Cinema primes, these new zoom lenses offer a greater variety of creative
possibilities for cinema and video professionals of all types – whether studio-based or in the field.


Additional images

 Canon CN-E15.5-47mm T2.8 L S
 Canon CN-E30-105mm T2.8 L S

Comments

Total comments: 93
Dester Wallaboo
By Dester Wallaboo (Sep 4, 2012)

Sorry guys... this is one field I'm intimately familiar with.... and there is no way this camera is worth this amount of money. I'd buy a Red Scarlet before buying this camera.

0 upvotes
CMLGeof
By CMLGeof (Sep 4, 2012)

Well Andyshon I think you're wrong, I think that the release of the C100 and C500 show that Canon has a very clear idea of where their market is and how to price accordingly.

The C300 has been attacked a number of times as too expensive but if you compare it to similar cameras its not.

The C500 is certainly the one that I'm interested in and combined with a Gemini recorder it's a total of about $40K, that is a hell of a lot less than an Alexa with either a Gemini or a Codex.

It's also a lot less than an Epic.

So, you get the Canon skintones and full raw 4K for less than any other camera.

Obviously a really stupid move on canons part???

0 upvotes
SergeSmArt I
By SergeSmArt I (Sep 2, 2012)

$30K for it.. .. plus about $4k for external recorder + about $2K for SSD-drives.. and don't know how much more for WorkStation to edit RAW footage.. not too easy to get into it :)

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 4, 2012)

September 2012 fair market pricing for Canon-cams, based on what you might be getting for your money:

EOS C100: Around $3,000, certainly not a red cent over $4,000 for this AVCHD codec, 24Mbit maximum bitrate, 30p max. recorder that writes only to SD cards and does not even have an SDI interface. Even then, there are so many better choices in ILCs and HDSLRs for less money.

EOS C300: Should be withdrawn already, since the C100 and C500 makes it obsolete, and at $16,000 price, it carries a totally foolish purchase to boot.

EOS C500: $30,000 is a bit too much for this one, but if they can drop the price to $20,000 or below, AND if they ship the camera with a voucher for a free 4K external recorder included in the box, Canon will likely be able to make a pretty decent sales volume with the EOS C500.

0 upvotes
AmateurSnaps
By AmateurSnaps (Aug 31, 2012)

Only thing I've learnt reading the comments is Carver hates cannon and has too much time on his hands :D

1 upvote
andyshon
By andyshon (Sep 1, 2012)

Like AmateurSnaps, I scrolled down this page hoping to find some more information, perhaps the odd incisive comment, and some informed debate. If you read below you might think DP Review readers are aggressive, ignorant and have nothing better to do than take pointless snipes at each other. And then, like AmateurSnaps, I ended up joining in...

So, in an attempt to make recompense, and in the hope that future readers might find something less depressing down here, I thought I might try and write something less dumb...

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
1 upvote
andyshon
By andyshon (Sep 1, 2012)

I think this camera, and the C100, have surprised a few of people, who had essentially written Canon off when they announced the C300 with such an absurd price tag, and that crazy 4k SLR thing. This camera is clearly a much more serious prospect. But can it really play with the big boys?

With this kind of price tag, the C500 needs to compete at the very top of the market. And though it's significantly cheaper to buy than some of its competitors, this difference is somewhat reduced in the hire market, where most end users are likely to source such a camera. So I would argue, that to make an impact, the C500 has to shape up next to the Arri Alexa, Red Epic, and the Sony F65. That's some pretty stiff competition.

0 upvotes
andyshon
By andyshon (Sep 1, 2012)

The Alexa has become a really impressive camera as its matured. With a rotary shutter, optical viewfinder and sensor that covers the full 4 perf S35 academy aperture, it's really the obvious choice for anyone moving (reluctantly) from film. You can use the same anamorphic lenses with no crop factor or waisted resolution. You can actually look through the lens. And rolling shutter will never be a problem, even if you point the camera sideways out of a formula one car. On paper, it's resolution is starting to look a little low. So perhaps the Canon might gain a few followers here. But I can't imagine many people who are used to a 435 or an Alexa looking twice at the Canon. It must look like little more than a toy to them.

1 upvote
andyshon
By andyshon (Sep 1, 2012)

But this is perhaps not a fair comparison. Yes the C500 will cost you as much as a pretty reasonable car, but the Alexa is worth almost as much as my flat. The same goes for the Sony F65. This is a truly impressive piece of imaging technology. With an 8k sensor designed to output 4k with 444 colour, it produces the most impressive 4k I've ever seen. Noticeably sharper and better defined than images from the Epic, but with a smoothness that reminds you of 65mm film. But with a price tag into six figures, is it really fair to compare it against the Canon or the Red? And we're yet to see what the FS700 can do with a 4k recorder attached. Or the replacement for the F3. So perhaps these are the Sony cameras the C500 will be competing against, and they will cost considerably less than it does.

0 upvotes
andyshon
By andyshon (Sep 1, 2012)

So I guess, for the moment, it comes down to the Canon C500 vs. the Red Epic MX. When kitted out for 4k+ capture, they will cost roughly the same, and have a roughly comparable feature set. As we are looking to invest in a 4k camera for a production starting early next year, and are looking around this price point, this is a subject to which I've put quite a bit of thought...

Without going into all the features, I'll try to allude to the key differences as I see them, the differences on which a decision might hang. Obviously I've not seen the C500, so I'm basing quite a bit of this on the 300 and the quality of Canons RAW stills.

0 upvotes
andyshon
By andyshon (Sep 1, 2012)

In terms of resolution the Canon is behind before it's even released. The Red will do 5k at 16 bit/channel. The Canon 4k with no clearly stated bit depth, but I'm assuming 12 bit. But by the time the C500 is actually available, the Red will have had a sensor upgrade, to 6k. It also has a bigger sensor, with all the advantages that brings.

Here I think we have a really major difference. Red owners will be able to upgrade to 6k for $6000. When Canon release their latest greatest camera in a year or two, C500 owners will have to shell out for a whole new system. I think we are very unlikely to see a sensor upgrade program from Canon.

On paper, the C500 promises considerably better low light performance than the current Epic, and Canon stills cameras perform very well in this respect so I have no reason to doubt their claims. The Red is not great right now, but the new sensor promises considerable improvements.

0 upvotes
andyshon
By andyshon (Sep 1, 2012)

The Canon would be considerably easier to use straight out of the bag, and has better ergonomics for single operator use. For the documentary shooter who needs this kind of resolution, this might make all the difference. But no RAW 4k without the recorder attached (unlike the Red), and if it's the same viewfinder as used on the C300, then it's essentially useless and for any serious work you'll need to attach something better.

The Red SSD cartridges are absurdly over priced. Where as the Canon, with it's external recorder, allows you to shop around for the cheapest drives. This could make a major difference to the price tag, and is the main reason we are even considering the Canon, as we do a lot of work in the wilds and need plenty of storage.

0 upvotes
andyshon
By andyshon (Sep 1, 2012)

Canons colours have always been nice. Their colour science is mature and intuitive. I find it much easier to get the results I want from timelapse sequences shot on the 5d mkII than I do with R3D files from the Red. But Red is much much better than it used to be. And they have an established post workflow. R3D files are supported natively in all the major editing packages and Red provide an accelerator card that can decode the RAW files to 4k in real time. I've seen no real mention of what one might do with the Canon RAW after shooting it.

0 upvotes
andyshon
By andyshon (Sep 1, 2012)

Batteries are another issue, as are exposure guides, focus aids, shutter sync and many other minor areas where the Red simply provides the more professional options. So I think the answer to the question I began with has to be no. At least for us, as things stand the C500 is no match for it's main rival. If it was priced more in the region of the C300, then it might be worth a look. But when you can have an Epic for a few grand more, which out performs the Canon on almost every parameter and offers a considerably cheaper upgrade path, I think you'd need a very good reason to invest your hard earned cash in the C500.

0 upvotes
Francis Sawyer
By Francis Sawyer (Sep 2, 2012)

The lack of an integrated recording device is ludicrous at this point, when the Epic offers better resolution and an integrated SSD recorder in a camera that's not much bigger than this.

The C500 is the only product Canon has announced in the last couple of years that comes close to making sense, but it's still woefully overpriced and behind the competition.

1 upvote
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 3, 2012)

@ andyshon, you are getting into 4K now -- when Panasonic is already showing their 8K gear at IFA in Berlin? Whatever....

BTW, this particular Canon Cinema EOS C500 is NOT a 4K camera -- it cannot record 4K video internally, and does not even come with a 4K external recorder, because Canon does not make any. Got all that?

Glad to be of help, really.

0 upvotes
acidic
By acidic (Aug 31, 2012)

Sounds really awesome, but $30K is totally overpriced.

I paid a few hundred bucks for my phone, which captures 1080 HD with no problems whatsoever. And why do I need more than that? My TV, is coincidentally, also 1080 HD. Now excuse me while I go make some awesome cat videos.

Oh, did I mention that my phone also has a GPS, 3G, Wifi, Bluetooth, and can play Angry Birds? It can also make phone calls. Well sort of. What can this overpriced "uni-tasker" do? Yeah, I thought so.

1 upvote
Radonov
By Radonov (Aug 31, 2012)

@acidic, you missed something very important written in the beginning of the article.
This is $k PROFESSIONAL camera!!!
If for making photos and movie clips you are using your cell phone, this is not site site for you!

4 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Aug 31, 2012)

U R spot-on, acidic. The main reason this is a "professional" camera because the Canon press release states that it is,. And who are we to challenge the copywriters of a Canon, right? I mean, Canon always knows best, doesn't it?

This is a 1080p camera that does no overcrank or do slow-mo, and only at some future point in time if all the stars line-up just right in the sky will it be in fact able to record 4K resolution video, and even then only externally to a separate hard-cabled recorder unit that Canon will not even make.

For $30,000, this would probably be the last camera on Earth to get if you want to stay ahead of the curve in videography, or even just move along with the crowd.

0 upvotes
andyshon
By andyshon (Aug 31, 2012)

Erm, the article says 120 fps. That's as much over cranking as arri or red. On board compressed 4k and 2k 444 at 12 bit, this is more than a 1080 camera out of the box, and raw 4k recorders are already available from the likes of codex and gemini. Did you even read the article before you started venting spleen?

0 upvotes
acidic
By acidic (Sep 1, 2012)

My research suggests that there are more eyeballs watching low quality videos on the interwebs than 120 fps videos at 4k anywhere else. And it will probably remain this way for the next decade. My phone will continue to provide sufficient quality for fans of cat-videos for years to come. By that time, a comparable 120 fps 4k camera will be included in the iPhone 10S with a 3.5 inch 4k Retina display, which will sell for $399 w/ 2 year service contract. And it will be able to make calls. Sort of.

So tell me again why I should spend $30K right now? Yeah, I thought so.

0 upvotes
andyshon
By andyshon (Sep 1, 2012)

You shouldn't. But I'm guessing that most of the motion pictures you care about, the films that have inspired you or made you cry, were not cat-videos shot on a mobile phone. They were labours of love produced by dedicated people using the very best technology they could lay their hands on.

I don't disagree that the iPhone camera is more than adequate for filming ones child messily eating an ice-cream. But thankfully there is still some filmmakers out there with bigger ambitions.

2 upvotes
peevee1
By peevee1 (Sep 1, 2012)

They will sell so few of them that even at that price it will take years before they pay for their fixed costs.

1 upvote
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 1, 2012)

If someone wants a dedicated digital film camera, one might as well get one from one of the established film/video camera mfrs with a tract record in that area.

Canon does not have any. They are trying, though, and now are shipping altogether one single $16,000 1080p HD camera (EOS C300).

On the other hand, Arri, Panasonic, Panavision, Phantom Research, Red, Silicon Imaging, and Sony do have a good track record already, some better than others. Just my 2 cents' worth.

0 upvotes
Francis Sawyer
By Francis Sawyer (Sep 2, 2012)

"I paid a few hundred bucks for my phone, which captures 1080 HD"

I thought this was a joke until I read your follow-up posts. If you're that ignorant about cameras, you should be on this site to learn instead of trying to make snide comments.

Your phone records low-bitrate dogshit, compressed to hell in a GOP-based codec with pathetic color sampling. This Canon can deliver 4:4:4 color sampling for RGB and uncompressed raw output. So you can use this camera for greenscreen, and you can adjust white balance and exposure in post (if you shoot raw). You can edit without loss. You can color-correct without introducing banding.

When you understand the above, you'll be starting to understand the huge difference between a decent-quality image-acquisition device and a shitty cell-phone camera.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Sep 3, 2012)

@ Francis: mobile phone cameras are anything by 'shitty' as of late.

Regarding shitty codecs -- the Canon Cinema EOS C100 has a totally shitty codec, that's for sure. Old AVCHD version 1.0, 4:2:0 chroma, 8-bit color, maximum bitrate of 24Mbit. Totally no good, so let's not gang up on the mobile phones, shall we?

The EOS C500 (for US$30,000) promises a better codec -- provided somebody out there will actually make a matching external video recorder that you can connect to this camera head via a cable. I always loved those 2-piece video rigs with a separate camera and a separate video recorder tethered to it. I guess Canon is bringing the 1960s pioneering era back in the 2010s.

0 upvotes
acidic
By acidic (Sep 4, 2012)

"If you're that ignorant about cameras, you should be on this site to learn instead of trying to make snide comments"

I'm happy with my phone's video capability, which is um, more than capable. What more do I need to learn?

"Your phone records low-bitrate dogshit, compressed to hell in a GOP-based codec with pathetic color sampling."

Yet most people watch cat videos on youtube at low-resolutions on dogshit computer monitors. Notice that I don't refer to these monitors as catshit, since that would imply that they are good. That's right, everything about cats are wonderfully great, even their poop. Meow! Anyways, dogshit monitors and youtube allows me to keep my video recording standards as they are. We'll chat again when youtube is capable of exploiting this Canon's capability AND delivering it to millions of viewers. Guess, what? My phone can already deliver content to millions of viewers at its highest quality. Oh Snap! And it can make phone calls. Sort of.

0 upvotes
acidic
By acidic (Sep 4, 2012)

"They were labours of love produced by dedicated people using the very best technology they could lay their hands on."

Blah blah blah blah blabety blah. Many great films were made without the best technology. Here are 10 such examples:
http://on.mash.to/9bHEyU

0 upvotes
tom sugnet
By tom sugnet (Aug 31, 2012)

It's too expensive for me,
I think I will be getting JVC's GY-HMQ10 instead :(

1 upvote
Reservoir_Dog
By Reservoir_Dog (Aug 30, 2012)

Isnt this a site about digital photography?
I am totally NOT interested in those cinema cams.
Give us reviews, nikon D4? Canon 1DX? Where are they?

2 upvotes
AmateurSnaps
By AmateurSnaps (Aug 30, 2012)

Then stop wasting your time reading and replying to them you muppet

10 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Aug 31, 2012)

Snappy, your own in-depth technical knowledge and insightful contribution about the pros and cons of the Canon EOS C500 is most impressive indeed. Looks like you have lots of fans here, too, I guess they also learn from you about what this particular camera can do and if it is a good value for the bucks or not?

0 upvotes
Francis Sawyer
By Francis Sawyer (Sep 2, 2012)

"Isnt this a site about digital photography?"

Yep. And it just so happens that this camera is used for exactly that.

1 upvote
Rooru S
By Rooru S (Aug 30, 2012)

Very very good lenses...!

Not so good about the overpriced bodies. There are cheaper and better alternatives.

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Aug 30, 2012)

Why are these good lenses, Rooru? Are they as good or better than comparable cine-style optics are from Angenieux, Carl Zeiss, Cooke, Fujinon, Panavision, etc? If they are -- why?

0 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (Aug 30, 2012)

Whatever you think of their cameras, it's the EOS lenses that are the foundation upon which Canon's overwhelming dominance in the camera marketplace is built. Camera bodies change year to year, month to month, and these days, even weekly, but lenses are generally constant in appeal, performance, and variety, and therefore, are the primary drivers of brand loyalty among knowledgeable photographers and budding enthusiasts.

1 upvote
Rooru S
By Rooru S (Aug 30, 2012)

Francis, I see them as good value because I know the quality EOS lenses do offer (optical quality). At least on paper, it's comparable to the Carl Zeiss LWZ lenses, but time and reviews will tell if quality and of course, price, is justified.. On the other hand, the bodies from Canon, are quite overpriced stuff compared to competition with similar or better specs.

1 upvote
Mike Fried
By Mike Fried (Aug 30, 2012)

I think that these bodies aren't overpriced for what you get -- 2K from 8MP downsampled and 4K via extremely large pixels with modern CMOS technology paired with compatibility with the most electronic lenses since Canon changed mounts in the mid 80's as well as all the 3rd party lenses made for the EF mount. Add to that new optics, and you have some impressive kit. What other movie camera out there can you add a 600mm or 800+mm optic to at f/4 or f/5.6? Sigma makes a really nice 120-300mm f/2.8 and 300-800mm f/5.6 both of which can be purchased in EF mount. These cameras will be used to shoot feature films for sure, but also for wildlife documentaries where you want to get super close to the action from far away.

0 upvotes
Rooru S
By Rooru S (Aug 30, 2012)

Mike Fried...there are adapters. In Today's world, a body no longer can justify exclusivity on lenses to have such a price. There are other options around 8k and 20k that offers 4K Resolution and RAW output (with the proper recorder of course) and with the recent additions of adapters with electronic control over the lens, you can mount every lens from Canon to other brands bodies.

1 upvote
Spurtz
By Spurtz (Aug 31, 2012)

Rooru,

Yeah, the 75-300 f/4-5.6 is an outstanding example of optical quality....

Just because it says EOS, it doen't mean "very, very good lenses". And BTW, how did it suddenly go from "very, very good" to "good value"? if you're challenged again, will it go to "reasonable value" or "worth a look at"?

Comment edited 43 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (Aug 30, 2012)

I'm surprised that no one sees it. Ask yourselves, what do successful companies do in a constantly changing marketplace that lesser companies don't do? They constantly sow the seeds to reinvent themselves so that their product or service remains relevant to the marketplace regardless of how the market changes. Apple Inc., understood this, while Kodak didn't.

The Canon Cinema EOS line and the EOS M are the first new Canon image making products that will keep their EOS lenses and accessories relevant in a marketplace where they may no longer be able to rely on amateur point and shoot or enthusiast level DSLRs to grow market share. Unlike Kodak, Canon has planted the seeds to grow its marketshare at both the high end and the low end regardless of how the market for cameras changes. Canon's competitors will have to do the same if they want to stay in the game, and they know it.

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
3 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Aug 30, 2012)

Canon's "Cinema EOS" line of overpriced, under-spec'd cameras is going nowhere, and going fast. So sorry to burst your bubble, really.

0 upvotes
Donnie G
By Donnie G (Aug 30, 2012)

No need to apologize Francis Carver. I enjoy your posts. They give me quite a chuckle, and that's a good thing. Thanks!

7 upvotes
Thorbard
By Thorbard (Aug 30, 2012)

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, Francis, and yours may well be prooved right, but I wouldn't count Canon out of this market just yet!

1 upvote
Zanziboy
By Zanziboy (Aug 30, 2012)

I agree with you, Donnie G. Canon is making a really good foray into the pro video and hybrid camera/video market. It will be interesting to see the market impact of the Canon 1D C. Many movies including Red Tails have used Canon's 7D's and 5D's for shooting. If those camera worked well for pros, imagine what they will do with these new 4K products.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
1 upvote
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Aug 30, 2012)

Okay,.let's summarize the Canon "EOS CINEMA" line-up that is supposed to take over Hollywood.

They have 3 cameras announced so far, and only one model that is actually shipping. Of these 3 cameras, 2 of them are regular 1080p HD cameras that record at either 24Mbit/sec or 50Mbit/sec codecs -- nowhere near the recording bitrate one would need for good master quality video, let alone digital film. And these Canon EOS-cams cannot even record 2K video, only HD.

The 3rd model is the "4K model" -- it's just it cannot record 4K internally, only with a tethered external video recorder connected to the camera itself. Sony does not make any such external video recorder AFAIK, so you would need to spend $30,000 for the C500, and then look around for a 4K recorder from some 3rd party manufacturer that will work with it. What would you guys recommend?

0 upvotes
oscarchong
By oscarchong (Aug 31, 2012)

I so agree, it doesn't record 4K to any media internally. So it won't work like the Blackmagic or Red raw files.

1 upvote
Donnie G
By Donnie G (Sep 1, 2012)

Interesting, but lets not forget the reason for these long product lead times in the 1st. place, which is mainly to give 3rd. party suppliers a heads up so they can get supporting products into the supply pipeline in a timely fashion. Also, the long lead gives potential end users time to plan their budgets for incorporating the new products into their workflows so that they can take advantage of this new tech immediately when it becomes available. End users really appreciate the heads up. That's why Canon isn't the only company offering their customers solid info and even some hands on samples to play with well in advance of the actual product launch. The name of the game is called chess, not checkers.

Comment edited 5 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
Francis Sawyer
By Francis Sawyer (Sep 2, 2012)

I don't know why you're shilling for Canon, but you clearly haven't assessed their product introductions lately. This is a company with no direction. The baffling introduction of several misguided products in so short a time really inspires worry about their future and leadership.

We have the ludicrously overpriced and uncompetitive C300 that shoots HD. We have an SLR that shoots so-called 4K that looks, predictably enough, like crap.

Now we have this C500 that finally offers some good data-format options (4:4:4 or raw), but no integrated recording device. At an uncompetitive price.

The EOS M doesn't use the same lenses as the SLRs, so I don't know how it keeps EOS lenses "relevant." If you slap an adapter on there and use regular EOS lenses, you've added bulk and largely defeated the purpose of the mirrorless camera.

Finally we have Canon's failure to deliver a successor to the 7D that offers real image downscaling for video, instead of the hideously aliased line-skipping.

1 upvote
MediaDigitalVideo
By MediaDigitalVideo (Aug 30, 2012)

Does this one have LANC controle ?

0 upvotes
Arenas
By Arenas (Aug 30, 2012)

Anytime I click on an article about Canon cameras the comments thread seems to be littered with negative comments by a certain "Francis Carver." A google search for " 'Francis Carver' canon camera " actually returns 29,600 links. Mostly dpreview but also other sites. Holy cow this guy doesn't like Canon! Imagine having that much time on your hands! What a boring way to spend one's life...

6 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Aug 29, 2012)

Seems like Canon is unveiling their new cameras at least once about every 4 months. This now is at least the 2nd time this year they had "launched" the EOS C500 $30,000-cam.

This is a 4K camera body, but not a 4K camcorder, because it cannot record in 4K, only output in 4K. You would also need a matching 4K recorder connected to it, therefore, before you can record 4K video. Unfortunately, those are in short supply, to say the least.

The barely 3x zoom range lenses are not much to write home about, either. Altogether, a very pricey package for capturing pseudo-4K videos. Canon just cannot seem to get the video part right with their latest products.

0 upvotes
unknown member
By (unknown member) (Aug 29, 2012)

Thank you for sharing your immense wisdom with us. Your staggering powers of intellect are awe inspiring.

6 upvotes
Steven Fierberg
By Steven Fierberg (Aug 29, 2012)

Actually, this setup is a very strong for feature film making, which is what i do. They showed a prototype of this several months ago, this is now the 'LAUNCH.' The lenses they are making are IDEAL for features, 3x zoom makes them handholdable, mimicing the phenomenally successful Angenieux lenses. If you want a longer zoom for a large sensor like this, Canon also makes that, but you can't handhold that.

4 upvotes
jp1958
By jp1958 (Aug 30, 2012)

You are a troll.

0 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Aug 30, 2012)

Unfortunately, Canon really has not much of a clue about videography, let alone cinematography. They make good still photo cameras, although when it comes to their DSLRs and lenses for them, I think Nikons are better.

Canon is now trying to reinvent Hollywood. Problem is, Hollywood has already been invented.

If you are into filmmaking, and digital filmmaking at that, may I respectfully suggest you look into reliable, proven digital film camera and camcorder products by such reliable, proven companies as Arri, Panasonic, Panavision, Red, Sony, etc. instead.

0 upvotes
RPJG
By RPJG (Aug 29, 2012)

What's with the "4K resolution" lenses? Do any of Canon's L-series lenses have less resolution than that, for example?

0 upvotes
MediaDigitalVideo
By MediaDigitalVideo (Aug 30, 2012)

On what consumer device can you playback 4K Video ?

Comment edited 23 seconds after posting
0 upvotes
Brian Lund
By Brian Lund (Aug 30, 2012)

None. Not a single one can playback 4K video, so what?

The point is still valid! Canons DSLR (and lenses) are able to capture still images at resolutions considerably higher than the 8Mpixel "4k resolution"! I would say ALL of the Canon L series lenses have higher resolution than the "4k"! And that's even with the sensor only being about APS-C size.

1 upvote
Nishi Drew
By Nishi Drew (Aug 29, 2012)

Like "full HD" being the norm now, just a few years later we will start seeing affordable 4k cams, and eventually a 4k smartphone (if anyone needs that much resolution for anything...).

For watching, 720p is plenty enough, for editing of course the more the better, but still the more res means more prcosessing and on and on the usual digital flow

All I want is uncompressed video, 1080p is great... oh wait, where the heck's my uncompressed video for the 5d Mk3, Canon!?

0 upvotes
Reilly Diefenbach
By Reilly Diefenbach (Aug 29, 2012)

720 is pretty chunky.

1 upvote
Superka
By Superka (Aug 29, 2012)

both compressed and uncompressed video from 5D is not sharp. No sense in uncompressed.

1 upvote
ZAnton
By ZAnton (Aug 30, 2012)

You meant Nikon D800E, don't you?

0 upvotes
Peter K Burian
By Peter K Burian (Aug 29, 2012)

Canon spent millions developing an making these cameras and lenses. I just wonder how many they will sell.

Will Holywood get rid of their big Cine cameras and switch to EOS?? Movie makers use the EOS 5D III already for mounting on stunt cars etc. Do they need a $35000 camera for that?

And wedding photogs etc. are getting fabulous videos with affordable EOS cameras.

1 upvote
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Aug 29, 2012)

“This is our strongest-ever professional video line-up” said Kieran Magee, Professional Imaging Marketing Director, Canon Europe. “

Wow, they only have ONE PRO-CLASS VIDEO CAMERA out now (EOS C300), so if that is considered a "strong video line-up," they are in deep trouble.

0 upvotes
Jogger
By Jogger (Aug 29, 2012)

Not sure about the camera, but, those are beautiful lenses.

6 upvotes
D-Man67
By D-Man67 (Aug 29, 2012)

An 8K standard was just approved last week.
Oh well.. :-)

http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-19370582

Comment edited 4 minutes after posting
2 upvotes
Francis Sawyer
By Francis Sawyer (Sep 2, 2012)

Laughable. Who is even delivering decent HD?

Nobody in the U.S.

1 upvote
arthon
By arthon (Aug 29, 2012)

Canon C500 can record 4K with an external recorder; $30K + recorder.
Sony FS 700 can record 4K with an external recorder; $8K + recorder.

What is Canon smoking?

7 upvotes
Sdaniella
By Sdaniella (Aug 29, 2012)

Sony FS 700 is an ungainly and hefty 3.7 lbs w/o lenses... w/o external recorder...

Canon C500 already is ergonomic and more compact...
probably same wt as C300 (3.2 lbs)

Canon C100 is "15% smaller" than C300 (~2.7 lbs)

add a recorder wt (if 0.7 lbs (is this possible?))... the EOS will be same wt as the SONY w/o such a recorder... it the recorder is heavier... all the worse for the SONY... simple.

do the 'lug-around' math, and you'll 'get it'.

e.g. external recorder size is: 206(W)×174(H)×142(D)mm
how heavy is that??? (portable attachment?)

if the main external recorder's are already ungainly (say non-attachment stations are a giant BOX size bigger than a breadbox)... tethered(wireless?)... one has extra unnecessary camera heft to lug around on top... take your pick.

Comment edited 4 times, last edit 9 minutes after posting
1 upvote
ET2
By ET2 (Aug 29, 2012)

People/studios who will be buying a camera like this won't care about the 2 pounds vs 4 pounds weight or other nonsense like that. They have rigs, lights, and full crews (a dozen people) on the set.

Comment edited 1 minute after posting
3 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Aug 29, 2012)

Considering there are no 4K recorders to attach to this particular camera, let alone anything from Canon, I think talking about the exact weight of a vapor-recorder is an exercise in futility.

AJA might have one coming up, but if and how it will work in unison with the EOS C500 is open to wild guesswork.

Basically, for now you are buying an 1080p HD video camcorder for your $30,000 with this one. If you have the dough, Canon's got the camera, Bro'.

0 upvotes
graybalanced
By graybalanced (Aug 29, 2012)

You're kidding...right? What you're saying is almost the same as trying to construct an argument by saying that since the $200 iPhone 4S shoots 1080 HD video, and the $3500 Canon 5D shoots 1080 HD video, the Canon 5D is a complete waste of money.

Aren't you even going to ask what the 4K output looks like from each camera, not to mention the ergonomic and other workflow points that were made in the other replies?

2 upvotes
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Aug 30, 2012)

Canon has no cameras whatsoever in the marketplace now that can record 4K resolution video. Sony has. Red has. Vision Research has. And even JVC has. But not Canon, Nikon, Fujifilm, Olympus, or Panasonic, for that matter.

4K video will probably come of age by the year 2017 to 2020 or thereabouta, unless it is a dead standard and we will move from Full-HD 1080p directly to 8K video, which is actually a real possibility.

To have actually some affordable 4K computer monitors, television sets, and projectors would also be rather useful.

0 upvotes
CameraLabTester
By CameraLabTester (Aug 29, 2012)

Now it's the movie makers turn to be SPOILED.

.

2 upvotes
Peter K Burian
By Peter K Burian (Aug 29, 2012)

They are already spoiled with the quality they get from their $300,000 Cine cameras.

2 upvotes
mpgxsvcd
By mpgxsvcd (Aug 29, 2012)

Uncompressed 4K footage, the EOS C500 supports 12-bit or 10-bit RGB 4:4:4.

YES PLEASE!

$30K

No Thank You! This does look like a fantastic camera though.

3 upvotes
Knallberto
By Knallberto (Aug 29, 2012)

JVC HMQ10 4K camcorder (fixed 10x zoom 42.5-425mm)
€ 5000 :-)

http://geizhals.at/eu/730778

Comment edited 2 minutes after posting
1 upvote
MikeNeufeld30
By MikeNeufeld30 (Aug 29, 2012)

RED!!!

0 upvotes
Apewithacamera
By Apewithacamera (Aug 29, 2012)

What a bargan! I'll take two of them ;)

0 upvotes
Camediadude
By Camediadude (Aug 29, 2012)

To do before I croak: Watch a 4k movie (can you imagine a movie like say Avatar 2 in 4k, wow...)

1 upvote
Andy Moreton
By Andy Moreton (Aug 29, 2012)

Most modern cinema projectors are 4k, so just go to the cinema.

2 upvotes
Joseph S Wisniewski
By Joseph S Wisniewski (Aug 29, 2012)

Imagine, or remember?

The first Avatar was 4k.

5 upvotes
digitalsafari
By digitalsafari (Aug 29, 2012)

2K, shot using HD (1080p) res cameras.

Comment edited 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Camediadude
By Camediadude (Aug 29, 2012)

http://gizmodo.com/5511054/arri-alexa-camera-digital-cinematic-bliss "ARRI is also less concerned about the resolution race, citing the fact that Avatar was technically shot in 1080p (Cameron's Fusion camera system is technically just dual Sony HDC-F950s) and no one seemed to complain."

And fellow dpreview fans, let us not forget, it was shot at 24fps (like almost everything else), at that! I would like to see what 120fps looks like BEFORE I CROAK as mentioned earlier lol (drool) .. He is working on his new films in 48fps, with The Hobbit being the very first to get such treatment.

And no there have not been any 4k movies screened yet, I checked.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 3 minutes after posting
1 upvote
Nishi Drew
By Nishi Drew (Aug 29, 2012)

120fps for slowmo, even though 300 or greater is preferred there's plenty of digital work arounds to fill the frame gaps and smooth out the whole thing. Even 60 fps is enough in that case, though then artifacts and what not become more prevalent...

1 upvote
ScarletVarlet
By ScarletVarlet (Aug 29, 2012)

Better than 24fps for 3D.

How many times have you watched while a camera pans and high contrast items, such as lights, flicker horribly?

Get that frame rate up and digital will look much better.

1 upvote
Andy Moreton
By Andy Moreton (Aug 31, 2012)

Knowing, Disctrict 9, The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo, The Social Network, April Showers, all shot in 4k. Not all cinemas were able able to screen them in 4k but many did.

0 upvotes
Camediadude
By Camediadude (Aug 31, 2012)

Ok, I see your point, but most times when 4k is being thrown about, it is not actually true 4k, as can be seen in this comlex and detailed dissertation:
http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/the-truth-about-2k-4k-the-future-of-pixels
And just becasue it is shot on 4k cameras and then even screend on a 4k capable projetor, does not mean that the final image is shown in 4k, as has been mentioned.

0 upvotes
Scott Pickering
By Scott Pickering (Sep 1, 2012)

Samsara which was shot in 65mm film has been shown in two theaters so far in 4K, so your comment is no longer accurate Camedia.

0 upvotes
ZAnton
By ZAnton (Aug 29, 2012)

They'd better make precise metering and higher DR on their DSLRs.

Comment edited 2 times, last edit 6 minutes after posting
0 upvotes
JackM
By JackM (Aug 29, 2012)

Canon is an enormous company, they can do both. In addition to making satellites and other stuff.

Comment edited 38 seconds after posting
1 upvote
Francis Carver
By Francis Carver (Aug 29, 2012)

Hollywood and New York equipment rental houses will buy one or more of every high-end, high-price camera ever released. And who else?

0 upvotes
Total comments: 93