Canon Expo 2010

sprinkles

Was going to post this in Off Topic thread but there's so much going on at it I think it deserves it's own thread - couldn't find one for it, apologies if there is one already!

Multi-purpose 4k camera



Looks like Canon are progressing with the theory that some time in the not too distant future we will be just shooting video at a high enough resolution and 60fps that we can choosing stills from it. I'd hate to see this become the reality. Where's the skill in selecting and waiting for the perfect shot? It just seems like a lazy way to do it. I'm sure film photographers feel the same way about digital but I do think this is a step in the wrong direction. As a movie camera it looks like a decent attempt at a competitor to the RED 4k. Pity it's not being billed as one or put into production.

120MP sensor. Here's the camera and a photo.




Again not a production unit (obviously) but gives us a hint at the quality that we can expect to see in "few" years down the road.

And finally, Canon's 360 degree camera....



No more botched stitching attempts

charybdis

sprinkles wrote: »

Multi-purpose 4k camera



Looks like Canon are progressing with the theory that some time in the not too distant future we will be just shooting video at a high enough resolution and 60fps that we can choosing stills from it. I'd hate to see this become the reality. Where's the skill in selecting and waiting for the perfect shot? It just seems like a lazy way to do it. I'm sure film photographers feel the same way about digital but I do think this is a step in the wrong direction. As a movie camera it looks like a decent attempt at a competitor to the RED 4k. Pity it's not being billed as one or put into production.

This camera is so stupid. I can't believe Canon have accidentally wandered into being a major player in the cinema camera industry and then trot out this nonsense. It just demonstrates the fundamental disconnect between what would actually make a good camera and what some designers/engineers in Canon came up with in their sensory deprivation tank that hasn't had contact with the outside world for four years.

The fact that they think the only important factor is in producing a "4K" camera shows how little they understand what they're doing. It's embarrassing to watch a large company perch on the edge of greatness and squander their resources like this.

Someone needs to hide the crack pipe from Canon's executives.

democrates

So frustrating to see how they waste the money we overpaid. Even in production, a zoom fisheye and a spate of tilt-shifts? Pet niche projects left right and centre but they can't deliver a decent frikking lens cap, plus we've months of delays on mainstream gear.

So galling then to discover that third party firmware adds features, proving that canon hobbles our cameras. Scrotes. Is it just me or does the range of eos slr's look over-segmented? Surely 5 eos bodies is all that's really needed, a 100D entry-level all rounder, a 10D, 10Ds, 1D, 1Ds and make them as good as they can sold as cheap as they can given the competition.

This rubbish has to be down to board-level marketing myopia, the engineers can push the envelope and will do what they're told...

smash

charybdis wrote: »

The fact that they think the only important factor is in producing a "4K" camera shows how little they understand what they're doing.

Yea totally, one of the largest camera manufacturers in world have no idea what they're doing... :rolleyes::rolleyes:

democrates wrote: »

So frustrating to see how they waste the money we overpaid.

Well you paid it didn't you? What they do with their money is up to them whether it's just a training exercise or an advancement on current technologies.

Effects

democrates wrote: »

but they can't deliver a decent frikking lens cap, plus we've months of delays on mainstream gear.

All my lens caps work fine. Why bother trying to fix something that's not broken?

charybdis

steve06 wrote: »

Yea totally, one of the largest camera manufacturers in world have no idea what they're doing... :rolleyes::rolleyes:

It almost sounds like you're being sarcastic.

democrates

steve06 wrote: »

Well you paid it didn't you? What they do with their money is up to them whether it's just a training exercise or an advancement on current technologies.

Yes I paid and I love the 5DII which finally arrived, I knew the price was artificially high because canon and nikon have a virtual cartel for systems at that spec level. It wouldn't surprise me if illegal price-fixing were afoot as happened with lcd's. I'll probably overpay again, anyone wishing to take photographs with that level of system has no alternative but to get fleeced.

Misgivings about the unhealthy market are compounded when we see resources squandered on blue-sky projects at the expense of practical advances we can use.

Effects wrote: »

All my lens caps work fine. Why bother trying to fix something that's not broken?

'Work fine' is a far cry from best design. Nikon and even Sigma have lens caps where you pinch at the front so can get them on and off easily with the lens hood on. Even if there were some case for side pinch caps you'd expect one of each supplied with a 2k lens, plus a damn cloth to clean it. /rant

sprinkles

charybdis wrote: »

This camera is so stupid. I can't believe Canon have accidentally wandered into being a major player in the cinema camera industry and then trot out this nonsense. It just demonstrates the fundamental disconnect between what would actually make a good camera and what some designers/engineers in Canon came up with in their sensory deprivation tank that hasn't had contact with the outside world for four years.

The fact that they think the only important factor is in producing a "4K" camera shows how little they understand what they're doing. It's embarrassing to watch a large company perch on the edge of greatness and squander their resources like this.

Someone needs to hide the crack pipe from Canon's executives.

Are you serious? You're actually saying that Canon engineers don't understand what the camera buying public/professionals want? And where did you get the only important factor was in producing a 4k camera from? It's pet projects like these that advance technology for other production models. This is true in nearly all areas of technology R&D. It solutions to problems that these types of projects throw up that more often than not prove to be the real gem of R&D.

I seriously doubt they are just throwing away money for the sake of it. Perhaps they should stop these projects and put all their research money into better lens caps (for what it's worth, I have no issue with the current ones). In 4 years time they'd have the best lens caps and the worst cameras on the market.

charybdis

sprinkles wrote: »

Are you serious?

Yes.

sprinkles wrote: »

You're actually saying that Canon engineers don't understand what the camera buying public/professionals want?

That is exactly what I'm saying.

sprinkles wrote: »

And where did you get the only important factor was in producing a 4k camera from?

It reeks of poorly thought out compromises: a fixed 20x zoom lens that isn't particularly fast or interesting, a 2/3 inch sensor, shoots 60 FPS (which is essentially pointless, even for video); and the only thing the appear to be touting is that it records in 4K. 4K is utterly pointless in a camera like this. It is literally the exact same thing as having a 14 megapixel point & shoot: increased spatial resolution for the sake of being able to say they have increased spatial resolution.

sprinkles wrote: »

It's pet projects like these that advance technology for other production models. This is true in nearly all areas of technology R&D. It solutions to problems that these types of projects throw up that more often than not prove to be the real gem of R&D.

None of the elements of this camera are interesting from a production point of view. Canon have been making 4K sensors for DSLRs for years, they don't need to prove their ability to do that to anyone. The only part of this camera that may be potentially interesting is if they developed a way to efficiently compress 4K/60FPS footage to a format that could be written to a CF card and allow grading latitude in post. This would be quite impressive, except they haven't done it. What Canon touts about this camera: it's compact & light, "4K", 60FPS, zoom lens, environment friendly.

Canon doesn't need to show that they can build sensors, they need to show how their going to get usable data from those sensors in video mode. There is literally nothing in this camera that in any way attests to an attempt to do this.

sprinkles wrote: »

I seriously doubt they are just throwing away money for the sake of it.

I think they (correctly) assumed that they could show off a piece of plastic behind glass with the term "4K" and it would be widely reported as being an incredible camera because "it's the same as what Red are doing".

sprinkles

charybdis wrote: »

Yes.



That is exactly what I'm saying.

I have to disagree with this. I think the recent line of consumer p&S and the prosumer DSLRs from Canon have been excellent. Where they are falling behind is by updating the 5D, similar low light performance to the 7D would be a nice touch in a full frame sensor but that is no doubt on the way. I can't see how, by displaying some new tech, they are ignoring their current or potential customers.

charybdis wrote: »

It reeks of poorly thought out compromises: a fixed 20x zoom lens that isn't particularly fast or interesting, a 2/3 inch sensor, shoots 60 FPS (which is essentially pointless, even for video); and the only thing the appear to be touting is that it records in 4K. 4K is utterly pointless in a camera like this. It is literally the exact same thing as having a 14 megapixel point & shoot: increased spatial resolution for the sake of being able to say they have increased spatial resolution.

This is a prototype which displays their capability of producing a 4k camera which can record 4k resolution out of an 8 megapixel 2/3-inch CMOS sensor. I was impressed as I didn't realise that was possible. They were not touting the lens as anything special, they are displaying their vision of the future of photography, a future I don't particularly buy into but none the less it's impressive.

charybdis wrote: »

None of the elements of this camera are interesting from a production point of view. Canon have been making 4K sensors for DSLRs for years, they don't need to prove their ability to do that to anyone. The only part of this camera that may be potentially interesting is if they developed a way to efficiently compress 4K/60FPS footage to a format that could be written to a CF card and allow grading latitude in post. This would be quite impressive, except they haven't done it. What Canon touts about this camera: it's compact & light, "4K", 60FPS, zoom lens, environment friendly.

That is impressive alone. I guess they've demonstrated this using existing tech, and yet there's no other 2/3-inch CMOS sensor, that I know of, that is capable of producing 4k @60fps. Without a camera that can do that what would be the point of developing a way to compress the footage shot to a CF card? Without the hardware that process would be pointless.... I'd presume they are working on that.

stcstc

the point of these cameras is the indy film market is growing exponetially

the buy in price just 4 or 5 years ago was around 100K to get a single camera setup to do HD for indy production

Now go to any show and see the market for both cameras and 3rd party addons ( like steady cam for example) and see how many people are around this stuff and you will understand the market potential

and companies like canon, who have the real grounding in the optics can now produce a kit for less than around 10 - 20K

the major jump in indy production is being able to do 2k and 4K shooting with proper pull focus etc and proper DOF, which isnt availale in normal video systems. it gives them something close to 16mm and 35mm film production without all of the massive telecine and colourist costs, and with kit at less than 20% of the cost of 5 years ago

its not about the stills photography market directly, its about a merging between it and the motion photography market.

charybdis

sprinkles wrote: »

I have to disagree with this. I think the recent line of consumer p&S and the prosumer DSLRs from Canon have been excellent. Where they are falling behind is by updating the 5D, similar low light performance to the 7D would be a nice touch in a full frame sensor but that is no doubt on the way. I can't see how, by displaying some new tech, they are ignoring their current or potential customers.

The re-introduction of the S series P&S category was a good idea but the "prosumer" DSLR line has been pretty lacklustre. Putting the same AF system in the 5D2 as in the 5D, cramming pixels on to an APS-C sensor with the 50D, 7D, 550D, 60D et al., treating video as a gimmick initially and then eventually making it a core selling point when they realised it's what interests people all show that they're more interested in seeming more compelling on a spec. sheet than actually making good cameras.

sprinkles wrote: »

This is a prototype which displays their capability of producing a 4k camera which can record 4k resolution out of an 8 megapixel 2/3-inch CMOS sensor. I was impressed as I didn't realise that was possible. They were not touting the lens as anything special, they are displaying their vision of the future of photography, a future I don't particularly buy into but none the less it's impressive.

It's a concept camera, not a prototype; it will never see production. "4K" literally means "four thousand pixels on the longest side", for a 2:3 aspect ratio, this means a roughly 11 megapixel sensor. Whoop-de-doo. Eleven megapixels. On a 2/3 inch sensor. Canon currently make P&S cameras with smaller sensors in the 14 megapixel range. Cramming an oversized number of pixels on to a small sensor has never been a good thing.

I agree the lens isn't anything special, but it's still a fixed zoom lens on a concept camera that they could theoretically have done anything with. If the conceptual limits of the Canon camera design team rest at putting a lens with a huge zoom range on a small sensor camera, we're all in a lot of trouble.

Again, it would be impressive if they were writing a gradable 4K file to disk (or CF card), but this isn't the technology they've chosen to showcase. They've stuck an 11 megapixel sensor in an unergonomic camera and called it a 4K camera. It's pathetic.

sprinkles wrote: »

That is impressive alone. I guess they've demonstrated this using existing tech, and yet there's no other 2/3-inch CMOS sensor, that I know of, that is capable of producing 4k @60fps. Without a camera that can do that what would be the point of developing a way to compress the footage shot to a CF card? Without the hardware that process would be pointless.... I'd presume they are working on that.

It's not impressive, it's embarrassing. 4K @ 60FPS is a generally undesirable result, particularly when the sensor delivering it is only 2/3 inch. The point of developing technology to capture gradable 4K footage to a CF card is to have a 5D2-like camera that can actually take advantage of its 21 megapixel sensor, downres to 4K without line-skipping/pixel-binning, and with enough bit depth that it's actually usable in a traditional post-production/grading environment. Right now they're showing us a small 11 megapixel sensor outputting something (i.e.: probably not of a high bit depth) that's essentially useless for anything anyone would realistically want 4K footage for. 60FPS is a pretty useless framerate also. It'd be nice if the framerate was selectable at anything up to 60FPS, but as far as we're told, 60FPS is the only speed it'll run at.

My point is, if they are working on it, this camera certainly isn't evidence of it. In fact, it's evident that they're diverting resources elsewhere.

stcstc wrote: »

the point of these cameras is the indy film market is growing exponentially

the buy in price just 4 or 5 years ago was around 100K to get a single camera setup to do HD for indy production

Now go to any show and see the market for both cameras and 3rd party addons ( like steady cam for example) and see how many people are around this stuff and you will understand the market potential

and companies like canon, who have the real grounding in the optics can now produce a kit for less than around 10 - 20K

the major jump in indy production is being able to do 2k and 4K shooting with proper pull focus etc and proper DOF, which isnt availale in normal video systems. it gives them something close to 16mm and 35mm film production without all of the massive telecine and colourist costs, and with kit at less than 20% of the cost of 5 years ago

its not about the stills photography market directly, its about a merging between it and the motion photography market.

4K alone is worthless. 4K is just a measurement of horizontal spatial resolution. Saying a camera is good because it produces a 4K file is the exact same thing as saying a camera is good because it produces a high-megapixel file.

The indy film market doesn't want a 4K camera with a 2/3 inch chip. The reason the indy market has flocked to the 5D2 isn't because it produces a 1080P file, it's because of the sensor size. When the 5D2 came out it could record at one framerate (30p, not 29.97p), its codec was pretty awful in terms of post production, and exposure wasn't controllable in video mode; and yet is was embraced by the indy film community purely because of the physical size of the sensor in the camera. Cheap 1080p cameras were widely available when it was released; arguably better 1080p cameras were available when it was released; and yet it was popular to a degree that it completely caught Canon off-guard and immediately made inroads into the professional (traditionally 35mm-film based) cinematography world.

No film maker, indy or otherwise, is going to want a 60FPS camera for normal use (unless you're Jim Cameron making a 3D film or one of those idiots who like those 100Hz "motion smoothing" TVs that are an abscess on humanity).

The cinema market isn't interested in a 4K image at 60FPS from a 2/3 inch sensor when they can get a 1080P image from a full-frame sensor that has similar correction/grading possibilities. 2/3 inch sensors are crap for shallow depth-of-field as the format is smaller than even 16mm film. Even 35mm film (in cinema terms) is close to Canon's APS-C format sensor size. The advantage of the 5D2 is that it offers a greater-than-super-35 or VistaVision size format at an absurdly low price.

Canon's lenses are not designed for video. They breathe, they don't match colour and transmission between models, they don't have focus rings with hard infinity stops, they don't have focus rings that are particularly accurate in terms of the distance indicated by the lens at which it is focused at, they're poorly quality controlled as video lenses, they're usually only an approximation of their stated focal length; all of this is largely irrelevant to stills photography, but it's a major failing in terms of the lenses used as video lenses. The major advantages of Canon lenses for video is that they're cheap, and they the non-EF-s models cover a 36x24mm sensor.

Canon seem to think that whatever gets them to a "4K" video format will make them a legitimate cinema company, the reality is that there are far more pressing considerations for them to address that they have not even approached by showcasing this concept camera. The dearth of understanding they've displayed by pimping it out as being an important technical point shows that despite the massive inroads into the cinematography industry carved by the 5D2 they do not have any idea what to do regarding making cameras for use as video cameras.

In short: this camera shows that Canon don't understand why their DSLRs are popular as cinema cameras and instead of putting resources into improving them have decided to make an utterly pointless and dead-ended concept camera to show off at a trade show for the expressed purpose of claiming they're making a "4K" camera.