# WTF Canon



## runnah (Apr 7, 2015)

So after getting very frustrated at times with my 5d mkiii I finally installed magic lantern and what a revelation! Focus peakings, zebra, raw video, clean(er) HDMI out, false color, real wave forms, the list goes on. All tools that make a video shooter's life so much easier.

What kills me is that it is all just firmware update.

So whats the deal? Why do Canon and other feel the need to not include simple software tweaks to make their products so much better/easier to use?


----------



## Derrel (Apr 7, 2015)

Canon has a history of deliberately crippling cameras via incomplete sets of firmware, so as to force users to buy higher-priced models that are up the ladder...like their fancy cinema d-slr body in this case. The early-2000's era of Magic Lantern firmware updates really drove this point home, that the camera hardware has a ton of capabilities that Canon has deliberately not "activated"...so as not to cannibalize higher-priced models. Remember when the early Rebels were unlocked with Magic Lantern? OMG!!! it was like a whole new level of camera...for $999!

What is the price of that Canon cinema camera...it was around $15K, but they lowered the price $4,000-some-odd dollars a while back. Okay, I see it now, $7999 at B&H.
Canon EOS-1D C Camera Body Only 6994B002 B H Photo Video

I see that the "old" C100 has been fire-saled now that the C100 Mark II is out at $6,000...of course, that's a different animal. I know you need 4k for clients who want 4k video!

As for the simple software (firmware) tweaks being left out...it's a form of self-protection I guess, of their other models. As the camera market has declined in sales, I think they want to try and create some artificial advantages to those high-ticket bodies like the 1D C, just to keep a few of those moving out the door.


----------



## runnah (Apr 7, 2015)

No that all makes sense, its just confusing as to why rather than reward people for using products they punish and force into other models. If it were me and I saw that mk3's were selling like hot cakes to the video crowd I'd add the features that EVERYONE is calling for.

And to keep this post fair and balanced I will state that Nikon doesn't have focus peaking or "real" AF.


----------



## runnah (Apr 7, 2015)

Derrel said:


> Canon has a history of deliberately crippling cameras via incomplete sets of firmware, so as to force users to buy higher-priced models that are up the ladder...like their fancy cinema d-slr body in this case. The early-2000's era of Magic Lantern firmware updates really drove this point home, that the camera hardware has a ton of capabilities that Canon has deliberately not "activated"...so as not to cannibalize higher-priced models. Remember when the early Rebels were unlocked with Magic Lantern? OMG!!! it was like a whole new level of camera...for $999!
> 
> What is the price of that Canon cinema camera...it was around $15K, but they lowered the price $4,000-some-odd dollars a while back. Okay, I see it now, $7999 at B&H.
> Canon EOS-1D C Camera Body Only 6994B002 B H Photo Video
> ...



Frankly the 1D-C and the C100 were both a bit of a misstep. Both trying to fill a need that wasn't exactly there. The c100 for example was besides the forfactor, not any better visually than the much less expensive mk3. The 1D-C is just stupid expensive and is right smack dab in the RED/Blackmagic territory.


----------



## rexbobcat (Apr 7, 2015)

What do you want to bet they won't put 4K in the 5D Mark IV as well, so people will be forced to buy their pricier cameras.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 7, 2015)

runnah said:


> No that all makes sense, its just confusing as to why rather than reward people for using products they punish and force into other models. If it were me and I saw that mk3's were selling like hot cakes to the video crowd I'd add the features that EVERYONE is calling for.
> 
> And to keep this post fair and balanced I will state that Nikon doesn't have focus peaking or "real" AF.



I think the corporate-think mentality is just simply very deeply ingrained in these big corporations...gotta' protect "this segment" from "that segment"...nevermind what that customers want or need. Thom Hogan wrote a piece last week, talking about how the Japanese camera designers have almost no connection with how their stuff is actually being used in the real world...and we the users suffer for that. It's almost a manufacturer vs user disconnect. But I think the bean counters and heads of engineering have very strong influence in how the products are allowed to stack up against one another, and against other competing offerings from other makers.

Lower-end cameras not offering HSS capability, for example...I think that is also most likely deliberate firmware crippling. "Oh--you want HHS capability? Wellll, we have that for ya',  just buy a $1299 or more expensive body!" I think part of this deliberate firmware crippling can also be traced to *the way people are shopping *nowadays: ON-LINE!!! Potential buyers can go down these specification comparison lists on-line...check,check,check,check,check, NO-check! OMG!!! I can't do this! And this! Oh no! I gotta' buy Model X, the next one up!" I call this "check-mark compliance" or "buzzword-compliance." Sometimes a badly-implemented feature is added simply because it fills in a check-mark box against Brand X.

To the buyer who is shopping for gear on the internet, having "some" check mark boxes incomplete is the signal that they need to look higher up the price ladder; people are buying based on specification lists now, more than ever before. And so, I think it makes sense to the corporate heads that hey...we can develop this camera, but leave it not fully-fully operational, and that will attract the lower-dinero buyers, and force the higher-aspiration guys and gals upward, and THEN, later, we can if we want, "activate" the firmware fully and introduce a new and improved body with almost zero R&D effort.

As to your comment, "Frankly the 1D-C and the C100 were both a bit of a misstep. Both trying to fill a need that wasn't exactly there," that dovetails perfectly into Hogans assertion that the camera makers are way out of touch with the people using their products...and it's yet another example of the way camera companies try and enter a horse in every single race, no matter is it's a broken-down nag or a top-runner....hey...might get lucky, right?


----------



## Braineack (Apr 7, 2015)

At least you *can* third party firmware.  Camera features are a joke.  How many scene modes will they add before the first useful line of code?

using tapatalk.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 7, 2015)

The Canon 1D C's development was ALSO more or less coincident with the development of those *gorgeous, uber-expensive* new Canon cinema lenses...gawd those things are beautiful!

Canon CN-E 30-300mm T2.95-3.7 L S EF Mount Cinema Zoom 6142B002

MSRP on this is $44,600, but it's on sale for $5,000 off, so, a shade under 40 grand...

So, the 1D C and other video offerings are only part of the picture...there's a lot of money there in high-end lens sales too. And, of course, sales of video gear are also in large part, to rental firms which have big, deep pockets, and those companies can earn good money off of the gear rental.


----------



## runnah (Apr 7, 2015)

rexbobcat said:


> What do you want to bet they won't put 4K in the 5D Mark IV as well, so people will be forced to buy their pricier cameras.



In which case, good by Canon, hello sony. I won't be the only one.


----------



## runnah (Apr 7, 2015)

Derrel said:


> The Canon 1D C's development was ALSO more or less coincident with the development of those *gorgeous, uber-expensive* new Canon cinema lenses...gawd those things are beautiful!
> 
> Canon CN-E 30-300mm T2.95-3.7 L S EF Mount Cinema Zoom 6142B002
> 
> ...



This is where it gets tricky. All the big cinema camera companies use Canon glass so that's who the $40k lens customers would be. But I can bet you that none of those guys would use the 1D-C as it is crippled by the rolling shutter issue. Not to mention that companies like RED have hot-swap SSD's, professional grade audio systems and a global shutters.

Really the only thing that would entice serious filmmakers would be the C500, but at $16k that is right in the middle and above some some much better solutions.

So right now we are in a weird place where Canon doesn't know what they want to make for whom. Although I did hear a rumor that the whole "C" line was going to go away.


----------



## runnah (Apr 7, 2015)

Braineack said:


> At least you *can* third party firmware.  Camera features are a joke.  How many scene modes will they add before the first useful line of code?
> 
> using tapatalk.



Get this, I just found out I can adjust the focus using the back joystick, and I can adjust the incriments as much as I want. So I effectively have a follow focus system without all the extra crap.


----------



## runnah (Apr 7, 2015)

Derrel said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > No that all makes sense, its just confusing as to why rather than reward people for using products they punish and force into other models. If it were me and I saw that mk3's were selling like hot cakes to the video crowd I'd add the features that EVERYONE is calling for.
> ...




Yeah it really does seem like they have no idea. But being that far out of touch wither their market is why DSLR sales are dropping like stones. 

Frankly the firmware update = new model seems what the Nikon 3xxx and 5xxx series have been doing and its only hurting themselves.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 7, 2015)

One issue we've not addressed is "aspirational marketing" and its halo products, as well as the Japanese tradition of face and reputation...if Canon doesn't have "something" high-end...they lose face. Even if they are not going to sell a lot of them, those high-end products get press around the world, and serve as sort of power/status symbols to the Canon fans and users. Sigma did this with their 200mm-500mm f/2.8 lens a few years ago....Nikon made that ridiculous 1200mm-1700mm zoom lens for basically nothing more than prestige!  Nikon Recollections Zoom-Nikkor 1200-1700mm f 5.6-8P IF-ED  Never mind that it's almost useless...it was bigger and better than what Canon had held the imaginary "lead" with.*..so Winning!*


----------



## rexbobcat (Apr 7, 2015)

runnah said:


> rexbobcat said:
> 
> 
> > What do you want to bet they won't put 4K in the 5D Mark IV as well, so people will be forced to buy their pricier cameras.
> ...



Hey, you could always buy their fixed lens, 1 inch sensor, f/2.8-5.6 4K camcorder. It's supposed to have around 10-12 stops of DR. /sarcasm

I'm glad I don't really enjoy video, otherwise I'd be getting really annoyed with Canon (more than I already am)


----------



## runnah (Apr 7, 2015)

rexbobcat said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > rexbobcat said:
> ...




I bash but they really do a lot of things right. But the things they do wrong are just plain confusing.


----------



## TwiceTown (Apr 7, 2015)

I think Canon is still stuck in fixed categories. They didn't mean to start the DSLR video revolution and still don't want to cater to it even now. But they also don't want to short video features in their DSLRs so much that they'd lose business. Hence, such token efforts to make video easier on their DSLRs. I'd say that the C100 wasn't a misstep. A little overpriced when new and cobbled with a lousy EVF and no overcrank but it's still a nice cam and I know a lot of guy that still use them including myself. Noticeably better footage than the mkIII, though the full frame sensor still has better low light noise performance. The C100 is significantly sharper and in a good filmic way. Downsampled 4K GH4 footage is sharper yet but looks really video and doesn't have as nice of color science. Camcorder form factor with NDs on a switch are what make it worth the extra money over the 5D mkIII to dedicated video guys. Also, no need to sync sound since the pre's on the C100 are very good. To rig a 5D mkIII to do what a C100 can so easily would end up costing you more than a C100 mkII and you still have to sync sound.


----------



## runnah (Apr 7, 2015)

I disagree on some points. The audio doesn't require any syncing when using a wireless pack. as for the sharpness the trick is to disable the stupid picture styles that come on the camera. This way you get a nice grade able and flat image that respond nicely to a minor sharpening in post.

But I will say the c100 is decnt but the price point is too high which is why everyone either goes for the c300 or stay with the mkiii.


----------



## TreeofLifeStairs (Apr 7, 2015)

Runner, I didn't know you were so into video.


----------



## runnah (Apr 7, 2015)

TreeofLifeStairs said:


> Runner, I didn't know you were so into video.



My first passion, photos came after...cause they are easier


----------



## TwiceTown (Apr 8, 2015)

That's probably the best way to do sound internally. Pipe a hot clean signal into the camera. But you can't completely suppress the horrible DSLR preamps so you'll always get some fuzz. The overall internal sound quality on the 5D is pretty low which is  fine for simple dialogue. But once the sound gets more complicated and requires editing/cleanup/sound effects, the higher quality sound that you'd get from an external recorder makes a big difference. Soundwise, the C100 falls inbetween the 5D and a good external recorder. It's actually quite good for a camera.

I think a lot of people are making the 5D mkiii work as a b-cam because it used to be so much cheaper and the Canon color science made it easy to match cameras. But you'd have to dial down the C100 footage to match the 5D as opposed to the other way around. You couldn't sharpen the 5D footage enough to really match. Especially if you use an external recorder on the C100 which brings the footage in line with the C300. The higher bitrate codec and 422 colorspace gives you a lot more to grade and edit with. Also, the AVCHD implementation on the C100 is better than the 5D and you can see the difference when there's a lot of detail in the image. The C100 resolves much better when the camera moves. The 5D turns a little mushy. 




runnah said:


> I disagree on some points. The audio doesn't require any syncing when using a wireless pack. as for the sharpness the trick is to disable the stupid picture styles that come on the camera. This way you get a nice grade able and flat image that respond nicely to a minor sharpening in post.
> 
> But I will say the c100 is decnt but the price point is too high which is why everyone either goes for the c300 or stay with the mkiii.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 8, 2015)

Canon JUST introduced a brand-new cinema camera yesterday. I got an e-mail notice about it around 11 PM on my cell...


----------



## runnah (Apr 8, 2015)

Derrel said:


> Canon JUST introduced a brand-new cinema camera yesterday. I got an e-mail notice about it around 11 PM on my cell...



I saw that, and had much drooling. BUT it is more or as expensive as the c500 which makes no sense. My only hope is the c300 mkI prices plummet so I can snap one up.


----------



## Derrel (Apr 8, 2015)

runnah said:


> Derrel said:
> 
> 
> > Canon JUST introduced a brand-new cinema camera yesterday. I got an e-mail notice about it around 11 PM on my cell...
> ...



I read the e-mail while almost asleep, and then hit Delete...but I thought it said the new cam had in-camera, direct 4:4:2 in 4k, eliminating the need for an external recorder, and was $2995 at intro...not sure on those stats...


----------



## runnah (Apr 8, 2015)

Derrel said:


> runnah said:
> 
> 
> > Derrel said:
> ...



Whoops, they released two cams, one was an entry level "look at me i have 4k" camcorder and another was a $16k production quality cam.

Announcement Canon EOS C300 Mark II. Full Coverage and Videos Here.


----------

