Canon EOS-1D C sees $4000 price drop in North America

http://www.bandpro.com/media/wysiwyg/Canon_C300_big_lens.jpg

Go and buy one in the Far East, if you want a real deal!

Feb 3, 2015permalink

lenseye

It's not just Canon, all these manufacturer's are milking the customers with exuberant prices because they can and that's the trend!

Feb 3, 2015permalink

isocb

Redefining 4K video: $4K price drop? Canon being ironic maybe?

Feb 3, 2015*permalink

AbrasiveReducer

So, when you stand in line to be an early adopter for your next digital camera, bear in mind that in addition to the possibility of undiscovered issues you're also making a great investment, getting one before the price drops.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

AlexRuiz

as it is true with just about everything else.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

Average User

Don't forget to factor in the pictures you were able to take while you owned the new camera. The opportunity to take those pictures will never come again. You can save money by waiting and not getting to take those pictures. On the same reasoning, you could save even more by not buying any camera at all!!!

Feb 3, 2015permalink

Bernard Carns

If it did global shutter, raw internally, on affordable media, then it would be worth $4000 tops with the bigger sensor and low light.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

birdistheword

That camera you described does not exist. Especially under $4000.

Feb 3, 2015permalink

Thomas Caudle

Rankles a little bit to know Canon was $4000 too high to start with on the EoS 1D-C, implying they probably inflate everything else they sell as well. Good argument for waiting two revisions, or buying second-hand. Too many revisions with too little substance for too much money?

Feb 2, 2015permalink

MediaDigitalVideo

Caskback for those who payed the full price Canon ?

Feb 2, 2015permalink

ryansholl

Lol.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

photogeek

I'd buy one, but the lens is not quite large enough. Can they make it twice as large (and heavy) as the body? I'll pay extra.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

duartix

Yes, I'll have one too if they add an extra battery pack.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

Andy Crowe

Feb 2, 2015permalink

Adrien S

Nope Andy, we'll only take standard primes that are twice as big.

Feb 3, 2015permalink

SmilerGrogan

People on this site get so crazy about one spec that they ignore the others and set their benchmarks too low. Who cares if it's better or worse than a GH4 or an A7.
The real question is how does the video look after grading? Does it output 4:4:4? Or raw video. Does it fall apart in cold weather?
How close can it come to the various Arri Alexas, Reds, and the other digital cinema cameras. How does the video look when projected on a 200 foot screen? How does it look when compressed to death by YouTube and watched on an iPhone? That's what's important, not some silly comparison to other prosumer cameras.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

badi

You are perfectly right, and that is why this range of cameras will be used by studios and real film-making...

But most of the peoples on this site, and especially the ones that "go crazy" are people who just shoot for small pro works, and even hobby... and of course, the GH4/A7s etc produce excellent results for their needs... unrivaled by any previous consumer/prosumer equipment...

Feb 2, 2015permalink

Waterengineer

And in the mean time the camera still costs too much for what it is......

Feb 2, 2015permalink

Smiler.
It does not do raw nor 4:4:4.
Nor does any other camera at this price-point.
Still the fs7 is a much better video package.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

Lassoni

Doesn't the Sony A7s walk over this, and for much lower price?

Feb 2, 2015permalink

ryansholl

I think that's safe to assume, since the discount alone is literally what you can buy two a7s bodies for today.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

http://camerasize.com/compact/#316,525,ha,f

Or one with the shogun.
Which allows for 4k pro-res HQ.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

brycesteiner

With the tech this camera has - 3 years old, it's pretty antiquated. Sure it has can do modern things, but the price should be more in line with $4000 compared to competing Nikon and Sony offerings.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

Eleson

How much have the actual street price dropped?

Feb 1, 2015permalink

ThePhilips

And people called GH4 "too large"...

Feb 1, 2015permalink

Frank C.

Me thInKs CaNOn jUst knOckED over the fIRst doMIno, imaGIng haRdWAre will TaNK in tHe NeAr fuTUrE

Feb 1, 2015permalink

badi

Check your keyboard, it seems it have a problem with random caps lock!

Feb 2, 2015permalink

James Booba

Sony FS7 ... 7.990
Canon 1DC ... 7.990

Hard to decide lol ... Crap Canon.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

Paul B Jones

Careful. Sony lost market share to Canon in mirrorless sales in 2014. Your only option in the not to distant future may be a Canon.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

Eleson

@Paul. Any reference to that?

Feb 2, 2015permalink

ryansholl

I think it was very well played sarcasm.

Feb 3, 2015permalink

Charlie boots

Makes one think that Canon has been substantially overpricing this camera and gouging the consumer since its introduction.

Feb 1, 2015*permalink

Usee

No surprise after the Samsung NX1 firmware update:

http://www.eoshd.com/2015/01/enormous-samsung-nx1-firmware-update-including-log-gamma/

http://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2015/01/07/samsung-answers-photographers-requests-preps-major-firmware-update-for-sams

...that makes the 4k capabilities even more attractive for video enthusiasts and pros...

...even GH4 guys seem to jump ship, to get a NX1...

...interestingly the guy who wrote the news on dpreview, didn't mention the NX1...

...for whatever reason.

Canon probably took a look at EOSHD:

http://www.eoshd.com/2014/11/samsung-nx1-review-glory-technology/

http://www.eoshd.com/2014/11/samsung-nx1-sigma-35mm-f1-4/

http://www.eoshd.com/2014/12/lets-see-samsung-nx1-really-capable-shooting-4k-sunny-lisbon/

http://www.eoshd.com/2015/01/enormous-samsung-nx1-firmware-update-including-log-gamma/

...and felt, that it is about time to act.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

art99

Even with ANOTHER 4K price drop, I still would NOT bite.
The mirror just has to go.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

maljo@inreach.com

Not selling well at it's current price.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

razadaz

Its price drops like these that put me off investing in any expensive camera. I know of no other manufacturing business where prices drop continuously after a product is launched. Even software companies like Adobe (where development cost is high but the production cost is zero) don’t drop their prices like this.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

ozturert

It's been 2 years since release. This drop in price is only normal (Well, more than normal this one).
And why do you invest in cameras anyway? Cameras are sold to take photos or videos :)

Feb 1, 2015permalink

razadaz

The investment is in the amount of work a camera can do before it becomes worthless or of little value.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

razadaz:

Really highend audio can drop in price much more significantly. Doesn't always happen.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

ozturert

If a camera can give you what you need, then it's a good investment.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

PicOne

Cameras aren't investments; they're purchases. You pay what you're willing to pay for the feature set you want. Concerning yourself with trying to project the future value of an electronic commodity is a pointless exercise.

Feb 1, 2015*permalink

lost_in_utah

PicOne, it's not their fault they don't understand the concept of "investment" or "investing"....

A purchase is not an investment. Investment assumes a return that exceeds the value of the purchase price of an item, with the time-value of money factored in. Your camera will mostly likely not appreciate, unless you're really famous.

Please stop saying investment when you mean something totally different.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

GaryJP

Any computer product pretty much starts losing value as soon as you pay for it. You are just not paying attention.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

PamlicoKid

We got to move these refrigerators…We got to move these color tv's

Money for nothing.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

marc petzold

yes, Dire Straits! But "Brothers in Arms" was one of their very best Albums, if not the best...Mark Knopfler is/was a very good guitar player.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

MikeFairbanks

Yeah, buddy, that's his own hair.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

Don051348

I guess I don't get it. If video is so important to some individuals why not buy a dedicated high end video camera instead of a stills camera that a manufacturer has slapped video capabilities into. If it looks like a dslr it's a dslr.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6xfOmTxXzw

Cost effectiveness, of course.

Both the body and the lenses.
DSLR lenses are relatively cheap and better quality than needed, even if they have other problems.
Those $25K+ Zeiss 70-200s, PL mounts etc are a bit pricey for a lot of lower end producers, students and amateurs.
Then there's the $10-30K camera body (for a similar sensor size).
You can buy an A7S, a decent lens set, rig and audio gear for something like the same price as the dedicated video lens.

And for bigger productions you can afford to sacrifice a DSLR if you need to take a risky shot.
Not so much for that RED Epic.

Feb 1, 2015*permalink

Joe Ogiba

The Sony FS7 E mount video camera is light years better than the 1D C for video.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

@Joe Ogiba and how does the FS7 compare to the A7s used in my example cost wise?

Feb 1, 2015permalink

Ben O Connor

İts now "just" 16.000$ !!!!

Feb 1, 2015permalink

andix

Could this be because nobody was actually buying it?

Oh wait. Rebrand it "Hasselblad" and the fools will flock to part with their money.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

cfh25

...or more probably "Apple" - they'll be queuing round the block on release day. What do you think that $$ loan is for (there again, more likely for Nikon!)

Feb 3, 2015*permalink

Lanidrac

So what?

Feb 1, 2015permalink

rhegde

A great lesson for marketing strategies from the manufacturers vis-a-vis actual consumption in the market! So long as a manufacturer is able trumpet the virtues of his particular product and then succeed in convincing a considerable section of consumers, he is able to hold his price vis-a-vis his competitors. A virtue could be anything - irrespective of whether it is genuine or imaginary, useful in most of the situations, or few!! Euphoria is what creates a niche in the market at a given instant, but alas, nothing is permanent!!

Feb 1, 2015permalink

Coyote_Cody

Something that Sony seems to do fairly well, Leica does well, Apple does well.

Its also controlling what a 'dealer' can sell a thing for (min. price) - control that and the price for all sellers is constrained .

But at any price only so many are able/willing to buy this cam - even with 4kHD capability, yes ?

Feb 1, 2015permalink

thx1138

Meanwhile in Australia no doubt we'll see a price rise of $4000.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

Adrien S

I'm not Australian, so please tell me - what makes you say so?

Feb 3, 2015permalink

J A C S

How many of the posters here have ever touched this camera? Let me start with myself - never...

Feb 1, 2015permalink

thx1138

Well if you have used a 1DX you have used a 1D C, a grossly overpriced variant with just a heat sink and different firmware.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

J A C S

Well, a fair remark, I guess. Let me rephrase it - for video, with dedicated video lenses?

Feb 1, 2015permalink

And why,
Would we,
Do that........
There are easier to use 4k capable stills camera's on the market.
Then Sony makes the fs7 for this "discounted" price.

Unless you need the best a fast action Dslr and 4k capability(now that is a niche) your better off elsewhere.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

thx1138

The video output is supposedly excellent as are the stills captured from 4K. Handling will still be awkward being a DSLR. If the price had been within say $1K of the 1D X from the outset I would have bought one for sure.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

"video output is supposed to be excellent"

So is the output of the lx100.
Same as gh4 with a great lens for half the price.

Still isn't a great camera for video. Just like the 1dc
But if you need a 1dx for it's speed. And you could make use of the 4k capability. Yeah then it makes sense. I do have a hard time thinking of a person that might want that without buying a gh4 next to the dslr instead.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

Plastek

Group of people choosing between 1DC and LX100 is non extstent. They are totally different cameras. You have no clue what you are talking about.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

J A C S

Why would we do that? To use the dedicated Canon video lenses, for example.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

Lassoni

choosing between 1dc and LX100? Panny, sammy and sunny make better 4k cameras than canon. LX100 is pretty nice since it can write 4k to a class 10 SD just fine. Just because something is priced differently doesn't automatically mean it's "better" at everything than the competition.

Feb 2, 2015*permalink

I never said anything about people deciding between the lx100 and 1dc.

I just said that great output means nothing on a video camera.
You still need to shoot with it.

The 1dc has no AF to speak off and no proper manual focus features. Then no tilt screen and no evf.

The lx100 also misses a lot of video features. But considering it's price having 4k with very high quality footage is more then enough.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

tirmite

The people who gripe about "exploitation" and "greed" and price gouging need to take a few economics courses. Profit is what keeps a company in business. If you don't think it's worth the money, don't buy it. If the market thinks something is overpriced then it won't sell. If new technology comes along and does something cheaper, better, faster then it will rise to the top. Canon obviously sold some at $12000. And they sold some more at $10,000. Now they'll sell more at $8000. At that price I'm considering another Canon 1D after switching to Sony a7's . I'll keep my Sony's, because each camera has it's own niche. I've owned several 1D versions and 5D versions and their IS a difference in performance, durability, reliability even between those two. Those qualities are worth a price. Three years ago to have a 4K camera with a small form factor was cutting edge and "worth" it to some pros. And now it's "worth" $8000 to some people. No one will be FORCED to buy it.

Feb 1, 2015*permalink

iAPX

Agree, and if someone think it should have been sold at a $2000 price point, why not start your own business, make the perfect competitor and make Canon out-of-business? lol!

Feb 1, 2015permalink

Frank C.

500$ by Xmas 2018, that's in 2018 highly devalued dollars of course

Feb 1, 2015permalink

Can you buy a 1DVI in good condition for $500 in 2015?

Feb 1, 2015permalink

Frank C.

2018 will see a deluge of 4k cams, the 1D C will look as passé and get CREAMED

Feb 1, 2015permalink

Not my question.

And right, in 2018 there will likely be many more good 4K shooting still cameras.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

2018 4K will be like 1080p today, 16K will be the new kid on the block.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

SSantana75:

Nope, and for all sorts of obvious reasons.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

HowaboutRAW we'll see ;)

Feb 2, 2015permalink

SSanta,

The problem isn't recording the data, it's processing it and transmitting it.

General use 16k cameras will not exist in a few years, unless humanity is given access to radically different tech this year. Yes I have something in mind.

So, no you'll not see such a thing in 2018.

Feb 4, 2015permalink

uh huh, okay.

Feb 4, 2015permalink

SSanta:

Just try editing 4K 30p on your i7 quadcore computer, and yep you will see.

Feb 4, 2015permalink

I've tried and did so fairly painlessly actually. The problem lies not on the resolution (4K) but on the codec being used. You'll find a stock desktop can handle 4K compressed (H.264 or similar) but it becomes an issue if you use a RAW format like CinemaDNG, but then again both low and high end system will struggle with that one. Video resolution is the new photo pixel war and most companies will cater to consumers who don't give a hoot about the 'quality' of those pixels as long as they are high let alone how they are being encoded. Also keep in mind that nobody who has spent 12K on this (or similar camera body) plus another few tens on lenses/audio etc. is going to be using a stock-standard i7 to edit their footage, so yes I still think there will be such high res in the next 4-5 years. Whether or not there'll be systems which can handle RAW formats at those resolutions is another story, but isn't that where we find ourselves today with 4K?

Feb 5, 2015permalink

SSanta

I still suspect you're wrong for 3 years from now, 10 is a different story.

Feb 5, 2015permalink

SSanta

I still suspect you're wrong for 3 years from now, 10 is a different story.

Feb 5, 2015permalink

The Davinator

I'm confused...is this really a 1D C, or is it just a 1D that a bunch of amateurs get all teary eyed about and rename a Classic". So confusing.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

tirmite

Yes, Davinator. That red logo is really a ruby and the "C" is made out of 24K gold. That's the ONLY difference and why it's thousands of dollars more. Or maybe it's a tool that in the right hands can make a pro thousands more dollars in billings per year by offering client's somewhat future proof video as well as stills. Just a thought.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

andix

Well then Canon should manufacture about 8 - that's how many of those professionals would probably afford to AND want to buy it.

Also none of them is on this forum. They probably are too busy counting their money to get involved in such petty debates, ehheh.

Feb 1, 2015*permalink

Michael Ma

Another $4K drop in the future, and it would seem somewhat tangible as a long term investment.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

Jahled

Word was sales were very poor. A strange beast the 1Dc, never quite figured it out as a DSLR or a footage camera at that price

Feb 1, 2015*permalink

KAllen

Was should not of had the x and c, it could of just been the C it covers all of the X. It could of been priced at x levels. It wod of sold very well. Weddings/portrait photographers would of been pulling stills off the video. It could of changed how people work.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

KAllen

Sorry for the typos , early morning on my phone without me glasses.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

Jahled

Sort of, though to be honest any video off that camera would seem like a bit of an overkill. Who shoots 4K wedding videos, and what's the point without a big bag of specialist gear and lenses? Dedicated film cameras would be much easier to work worth. And if it is a specialist film camera, i've never understood the point of being a sports camera as well. As I said a strange beast, ludicrously overpriced.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

KAllen, doesn't the 1DC have a smaller "super 35" i.e. APS-C size sensor than the 35x24 mm sensor of the 1DX?

Feb 1, 2015permalink

SmilerGrogan

You shoot weddings in 4K for people who own 4K TVs. There are still a lot of people out there who feel they must have a bigger, more expensive wedding than their neighbor or their sister, or whomever and part of that is having a better, more expensive wedding video. It's crazy, like most things that humans do.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

maxnimo

If the GH4 also gets a $4000 price drop I'm getting it first thing in the morning.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

uzman1243

Lol

Feb 1, 2015permalink

RyanBoston

Make sure you get the instant cash back option. :)

Feb 1, 2015permalink

And the YAGSHSSHS (sp?) thingo-ma-jig.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

Peiasdf

The Camera Store TV like Sony FS7 better. Same price at $8000.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

karlwunsch

Maybe it has something to do with the two ff 50.6mp dslrs Canon will be announcing late next week. This information has been available at canonrumors for a couple of days by now (with cr3 rating), but dpreview is known for being among the last to publish for whatever reason.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

petemod

That's because dpreview already has pre-production samples and the preview article is almost finished.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

So far it's a unconfirmed myth.
When Canon put's out a press article rest assured it will be posted.in the news section within minutes.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

That rumor is about a 5D replacement.

It still won't exactly compete for the same market as the 1DX or 1DXC.

If the 5DS rumor is true, that camera is an attempt to compete with the D810 from Nikon.

And Canonrumors says nothing about 4K video and the 5DS.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

karlwunsch

@HowaboutRAW
Canonrumors says there will be three new 5D line cameras. Two with 50.6mp sensor (5Ds and 5Ds R) and 5DmkIV, which will come later in 2015 and likely will feature 4K video ability.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

karl:

Okay I see where I missed the 5DmarkIV rumored 4K capability.

Still not really a replacement for either the 1DX or 1DXc.

The 5Ds aren't action cameras.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

As we've seen recently with Apple phones (that cost just a few dollars to make), goods are simply priced at what the manufacturer can get away, not what they are actually worth. All present day companies are driven by an unending quest to maximize profits.

Feb 1, 2015*permalink

karlwunsch

Just as all the companies of the past. Human greed is a constant of the Universe

Feb 1, 2015permalink

straylightrun

You're right. Everything should be free!!! What is this world coming to when we can't even get free products like we are entitled too??? Humanity is doomed!!!!

Feb 1, 2015permalink

PazinBoise

Yeah they totally over charge! I mean its not like R&D, distribution channels, marketing efforts, and all the employees that support a company cost anything right?

Feb 1, 2015permalink

Eleson

" ...goods are simply priced at what the manufacturer can get away, not what they are actually worth."
Actually that is what they are worth.
But maybe not what the cost to produce.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

VENTURE-STAR:

iPhones cost more that a few dollars to make. And that's even with Foxconn paying, badly, 22 years olds to work 12 hour shifts.

Feb 1, 2015permalink

Of course there is R&D, staff, marketing, distribution costs, etc,etc, but that is hardly the issue. Large companies like Canon simply charge whatever they can get away with for their goods. We are not forced to buy their products, but you can say the same about Apple, Microsoft and many other organizations who establish a dominant position and then exploit it for all it's worth.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

VS:

But Apple isn't selling the most smartphones, that's still Samsung.

Microsoft is barely dominant in OSes--after the fiascos of both Vista and Win 8.

I guess MS Office remains a standard. But no one really cares.

Now Adobe's PhotoShop, AutoDesk's AutoCAD, and Solidworks do dominate those software markets.

And Samsung and LG are the screen makers.

Feb 2, 2015permalink

Howabout -

I would beg to differ about Microsoft only remaining barely dominant. If Windows 10 is released as a free upgrade, it will secure their position for some time to come.

Yes, Samsung, Sony and LG share the same display screens, Apple buy in their components from many suppliers and most cameras use the same chips. Many cheaper Canon and Nikon cameras use optical components made by Sigma. So what?

My original point was the comment that companies like Canon price their goods at what the market will stand, as opposed to a fair value. If you've ever visited the Far East, you will be astonished at what some expensive items sell for there, even allowing for US or European taxes.

Feb 3, 2015permalink

VS:

Windows 10 appears promising, but now people who have been using computers daily for 30 years are in the position of making mass purchasing decisions.

And unlike 20 years ago, these people know how to use computers.

So if as stable as it seems, and usable, unlike Win 8, Win 10 will be a big option. But I think only dominant in places like architecture offices.

Feb 3, 2015permalink

Howabout -

Although I am not a fan of Microsoft, I was reasonably happy with Windows XP and continue to use Windows 7 as I don't like anything about 8. I suspect 10 will have too many pointless bells and whistles. If Linux was better, I would swap immediately. Nothing to dislike about Macs, apart from the price! But really, there's not a lot of choice, is there? I've been using desktop computers almost daily since the 1980s, but as for mass purchasing decisions, ermm, well, no, I'm afraid to say.

Feb 3, 2015permalink