It's a pretty sketchy rumor, but we're hearing that Canon's working on a pro video camera based on a 12.1 megapixel APS-C CMOS sensor similar to the one in the Rebel XSi. That makes perfect sense to us, actually -- DSLRs with video capabilities like the
5D Mark II and the new
Rebel T1i have definitely shaken up
people's expectations of prosumer video, and Canon's sitting on a well-regarded camcorder division primed to pounce on a new market. According to CanonRumors, the new pro cam will look similar to the
XL H1 pictured above with support for EF and EF-S lenses, sport fully manual controls as well as autofocus, and shoot 720p/30/60 and 1080p/24/30/60 to 56Mbit/s MPEG-4. Sounds pretty good, but aye, there's a rub: word is that Canon's DSLRs won't ever get similar video features in order to protect this cam's high-end $8,000 price tag -- which sucks, but also makes perfect (if annoying) sense to us. It's all rumor for now, but we'll see how it pans out -- the pro and prosumer video market are about to get crazy interesting.
posted March 30th 2009 1:23PM
They need to fix the rolling shutter artifacts of CMOS before they think of getting rid of CCD.
As to the idea that Canon's pro cameras won't ever get these features... that's more determined by what Nikon does on their pro cameras than what Canon does on their pro camcorders. If Nikon adds these features to their cameras, Canon simply has to follow, regardless of issues of cannibalization of sales.
The RED ONE uses a CMOS chip as well and while it does suffer from some rolling shutter artificats, this problem has been greatly reduced. In nearly all situations, it is extremely difficult to notice and, at least in RED's iteration, does not interefere with motion tracking/matchmoving in my experience.
The Nikon D90, on the other hand, is crippled by it's jello shutter.
The 5D does display rolling but it is more than tolerable.
In typical camera movement speeds and subject motion speeds, you must be conservative when filming in 24p so as to avoid stuttering. This speed of motion works well with minimizing shutter rolling.
The RED ONE has horrible rolling shutter problems. I do agree it shows minimal problems on panning, but filming any kind of moving subject (like a race car) shows serious problems in the backgrounds and in the spinning wheels.
The RED ONE is a great example of how CMOS isn't read to replace CCD yet.
I do agree the Nikon is worse than all of these.
I wouldn't be surprised if rolling shutter issues can be minimized so much as to make them all but invisible except in unusual situations. But I'd rather see that done before CCD is phased out instead of after.
They offer you cinema quality (dof and 24p) for 8000$ and you guys complain??
And I bet it will not be long before we see that on canon 1000$ hv20 equivalent in 1 year or 2. They just cant ignore the competition.
mpeg4? why not AVCHD?
I assume they mean an H.263... because AVCHD is a type of MPEG-4.
Having simpler compression can make footage a lot easier to edit.
It will probably use the AVC codec in an MPEG-4 container
its also rumored to have 12-bit RAW video file
no avchd because it's limited to 24mbps, they are probably doing the same xdcam ex mpeg codec that sony and jvc are using, bitrates up to 35mbps.
Honestly, why does anyone need to have video on high end dSLR's? Fine for consumer market but pro's and advanced hobbyists want better noise performance and features such as integrated GPS tagging..
Honestly, why does anyone need more than 128k???? Things change....
@tracknod: Apples to oranges.
One is a necessity to be able to run a computer, the other is an added on feature that compromises the abilities of the camera to performing the task it's really made for to add to the marketing material.
Why would anyone use digital? Film is fine!
I am not sure what the compromise is, my 5D II takes perfectly fine stills in addition to quite excellent video. The only thing that I'd truly want is the manual control in video mode.
couple years ago:
who needs dual-core! there aren't any programs that take advantage of it!
I was referring to the author of the post bemoaning that these features won't be coming to Canon's future dSLR's. I'm bemoaning the fact they people who don't use certain products seem to want everything crammed into it. Canon's high end dSLR should focus on image quality, not marketing gimmicks that work with consumer point&shoots and entry level dSLR's. Why add video to high end dSLR's at all if you arn't going to enable all of the same features as a full fledged video camera if it isn't a marketing gimmick?
Cramming in unnecessary features isn't progress. Increasing image quality is, and film is still superior in that respect.
Built in GPS tagging is pretty pointless.
Because photojournalists might want to take video footage. Because film makers are interested in such cameras, because they do a better job at replacing expensive 35mm film cameras than video cameras. Wedding photographers might be interested. etc. etc. It's better, cheaper and more convenient to carry one DSLR rather than a DSLR and a (semi)professional video camera.
@ wubbuda: ever heard of GIS?
@ kadajawi: usually people who get their weddings done have separate people for video and photo. If I was paying big $ for my once in a lifetime memories to be captured i'd expect that they focus on doing one things right. not constantly swapping between photo and video. Not to mention the video eats up a huge chunk of the memory so they have to stop and swap it out if they want to take more pics.
1) I don't see how it has compromised the still capabilities of the cameras in any way.
2) It makes perfect sense that someone who understands the basics of composing a good photograph will be interested in composing good video clips as well.
3) Even if there will always be better dedicated video cameras, dual duty would be useful to many, many types of photography. Wildlife and wedding photography in particular.
4) I want it so shut up.
Wow, you are really completely clueless, aren't you? Lower noise than camcorders IS one of the primary reasons why people want to do video on DSLRs.
Calling this SLR based is really deceptive and totally wrong. Just because it might use the same sensor and lenses doesn't mean it's based on an SLR.
I think all the high-end video features will eventually come down to the DSLR market. Infact, I think the future "video" DSLR market will start to give the Pro-Video market a run for it's money. Hi-End Video Cameras in the $8000 price range will soon fall into the $4000 price range and below. Canon may not want to do it, but their competition from Nikon, Pentax, Sony, Panasonic, etc... will force them to be competitive and lower their prices and add more features.
And... to answer "htd" question. AVCHD is a form of mpeg4.
@ehisforadam... This is what a photographer is saying to a videographer. Every person I know that shoots video is drooling to get their hands on and purchase a 5d Markii.
Why would Canon use a 12-megapixel sensor to produce a 1080p video camera?
Anyways, they'll have to work on the skew issues before this would be a viable video camera for most. Having video on a DSLR is a nice, bonus feature, but the rolling shutter issues are much too severe for it to be viable as the basis for a real video camera.
On the other hand, if they really are working on a dual-purpose video/still sensor, that'd be another matter altogether, but I'd have to imagine Canon's a ways away from having anything like that out on the market.
Man, that XL H1 is serious looking. I want one. I don't know what I would use it for, but I want one. I think I could find something to record if I had one.
I can picture the storm troopers running around with flip video cameras, then Darth Vader says, "I'll do it myself.", and pulls this camera out.
This section is for comments, not your stream of consciousness. Maybe you want chicken wings, too, but we don't need to hear about it.
Thanks, Dad.
"word is that Canon's DSLRs won't ever get similar video features in order to protect this cam's high-end $8,000 price tag"
Yeah, and what happens when Nikon (which has no video camera line) decides to implement all these video features in one of their future DSLRs? Canon will have no choice but to compete.
Exactly. Free markets rule!
mpeg 4? seriously...for pro video?
just wish they added autofocus and 24/25/30/50/60fps @ 1080p to the canon 500d they announced, they would FLY off the shelves if they did.
Prosumers would still want a camera like this as this will have much higher bitrate and external mic support etc. I'll wait for the Canon 550d, hopefully it may have external mic input, 30fps @1080p, autofocus, then i'd definately buy 1!
It's not a rumor, it's true. Canon is adopting the 5d MkII's chip into a video camera, but it will be about a year before the new camera is announced. The video division is shitting bricks, but accepting their fate.
It's fine... if Canon wants to try and protect their video market by intentionally gimping the new DSLR hybrids in the near future - someone else is going to come along and steal their lunch. And I'm not just talking Nikon or RED. I can imagine companies like Sigma, Fuji and Olympus - who have nothing to lose by producing a fully functional video DSLR - coming along and walking away with the market for "hybrid" cameras.
I don't know if this is the fix they need, but they have found enough ways to cripple their XL HDV series. Too bad, because so many people would be taking advantage of its overall excellent design if the specs were better. Panasonic has been kicking their buts in this category for almost 5 years.
Does anyone feel that a single sensor would be of lower quality than a 3CCD or 3CMOS system?
To those that keep posting that you don't need video on a stills camera, you do.
It's just that you haven't figured it out yet.
Many, many pros, both in stills and in cinematography are cross disipline now, shooting stills and motion.
Clients are asking for this.
People are creating jobs around this.
You guys will work out that you do need it, it might just take you a few years to catch up with the rest of us.
Canon can put the features into stills cameras and not cannibalise sales, because a video camera will always be better for shooting video.
Better audio inputs, better audio monitoring, better erganomics etc. etc.
You might use the video in your stills camera as a back-up or to grab a second camera shot or on a rig or something, whilst the bulk of shooting is done with your main video camera.
Please Canon bring this camera on and put the frame rates and features into your stills cameras too.
We want it and will buy it.
Jeez I just tried to buy 2 online from B&H yesterday and was told I could only buy one. Went back to order the one a few hours later and what do ya know, they're all sold out. Must be all those nature photographers, film makers don't want this. Canon wake up before I get the Panny and whatever Sony's got up its sleeve. I cancelled my HVX to get this but my EX3 IS on the way, just for the client who can't believe a lil cam with the slr form factor can do what it does.
We have been doing some test filmout using DANCINEL.EXE (tm) to 35mm Vision print film 2383 using frames from a Canon SD780 IS H.264 file, graded in my "freeish" feature film DI post system DANCAD87.EXE (tm). The H.264 file was converted into an Uncompressed AVI then the AVI was converted into BMP frames for color correction and resize/letterbox into 1600x1200 frames. The 1600x1200 frames were output off an LCD monitor using a ROSCO #22 filter with a total exposure of 120to180 seconds at T/2.8.
On projection noise in the H.264 stored frames was visible, and so were blocking artifacts in shots that were "timed up" to make the mid-tones lighter.
Unless Canon uses a higher bandwidth recording format and 12 to 16bit brightness information the RED ONE will probably be more useful for filmmaking. With Scarlet coming out, Canon should shake off ideas of making more "almost useful" products, and make something that work right, or they could loose even more market share.
Because H.264 and MPEG-4 limit grading range and have heavy artifacts they are not a medium for much serious filmmaking.
Also what's the deal with the restrictions on the use of videos shot with H.264 codec?