Canon U.S.A. Announces New Video Creator Kits
- Thread starter Canon Rumors
- Start date
roxics said:
I understand what you're saying, but this is about Canon marketing identifying a need and providing a solution. I'd also advise a parent to do the research and make better selections. I've tried doing that, and invariably get looks that say "I have a life, and just want to get my kid(s) up to speed," or whatever. I get that, and don't think that makes them morons. (And the $2000 gets you more than a camera, after all.)
I wonder why Sony or Panasonic don't provide pre-packaged alternatives, and get them onto the shelf at Best Buy, next to the Canon?
Upvote
0
CanonGuy said:KrisK said:
Nice to see that a company with such drive for 'innovation' has found their target market!! "People walking into Best Buy with their kids" lol! Keep rolling while others leap forward. Good luck to Canon and their fanboys
Be as dismissive as you like, it is the 10,000,000's of Rebel sales that has given Canon the ability to dedicate the R&D needed to come out with unmatched lenses like TS-E 17mm's, 11-24's, 85 f1.2's etc etc.
Who, exactly, is in the same league with regards lenses? I don't see anybody close to approaching Canon let alone leaping over them with regards innovation when you consider system wide innovation. But then I suppose I will be considered a fanboy :
Upvote
0
privatebydesign said:CanonGuy said:KrisK said:
Nice to see that a company with such drive for 'innovation' has found their target market!! "People walking into Best Buy with their kids" lol! Keep rolling while others leap forward. Good luck to Canon and their fanboys
Be as dismissive as you like, it is the 10,000,000's of Rebel sales that has given Canon the ability to dedicate the R&D needed to come out with unmatched lenses like TS-E 17mm's, 11-24's, 85 f1.2's etc etc.
Who, exactly, is in the same league with regards lenses? I don't see anybody close to approaching Canon let alone leaping over them with regards innovation when you consider system wide innovation. But then I suppose I will be considered a fanboy :
1. I sold my 50 1.2 and have 50+35 art in my bag. I am quite sure I will do the same with 85 1.2 once 85 art comes out (I and other 90% shooters do not need weather sealing)
2. Interesting how you didn't mentione about Canon's 'innovative' bodies lmao :
: : : :3. AF systems in D750/A7r ii is fast+accurate enough for my work (I'm mainly photographing wedding). I don't use speedlites much but even youngnuo has speedlited comparable to canon. Couldn't care less about DPAF (and canon+fanboys are selling this thing for last 2 years lol). i and other 99.9% shooters don't need that 200mm+ great whites. So couldn't care less about them. I do not know what other great system wide 'innovation' canon did according to their fanboys.
4. I know what you said is your opinion and you are entitled to that. I just hope canon is not satisfied with their 'system wide innovation' and sitting on their butt. Future will surely be dark in that case
Upvote
0
roxics said:
It has really good autofocus and is what most people on youtube are using so there's a good support community. To me the image looks fine if you're just shooting talking heads and compressing to youtube quality what matters more is the color profile, and the colors look nice. I've used all the competition–extensively–and if I were picking up a beginner's video camera I would definitely choose Canon. The image looks more than good enough and the ergonomics are best.
The entire "mid range" cinema market is a joke. If you want a good image for content that needs it, spend $600/day and shoot Alexa. If you want a "good enough" image for news clients or low end corporate videos, shoot C300 or FS7. If you want a "good enough" image for youtube, shoot on something like this (or there are other brands that are fine, too, but I would take this first).
If your goal is to get a technically great image for bad content by doing a lot of work, then that's where stuff like the GH4, black magic cameras, etc. come in. But you'll just be making music videos no one watches outside of forums like this and zooming into 400% to look at pixel sharpness because the content itself is a hot, unsellable mess. They're all fine cameras, but they're for a different hobby ("filmmaking") than Canon ("vlogging"). There's good amateur "filmmaker" content but it comprises about 1 of every 100,000 videos on vimeo. Same as pewdiepie is legitimately funny, but there are 100,000 poor imitators. Having sharp pixels doesn't raise your art, you do. Canon dSLRs are the right tool for a certain job, and one that imo is more interesting right now than low end music videos, for which you might want something else (the GH4 is slightly sharper in 1080p, yes, noticeably sharper in 4k downscaled to 1080p, and for a travelogue that could matter to someone).
If your only criteria is resolution this is a bad camera, but if your criteria are usability and the ease of creating a compelling product (for the target audience), I don't think you could do better. Unless you have more money or a lot of time to devote to parts of the production chain most vloggers (and businesses) don't want to get involved with.
Upvote
0
TeT said:
Carried away about what exactly? I still love my mkIII for my still portraits. It's what pays the bills. (less and less, however, as video is taking off). But I don't think I'm getting carried away at all when talking about the video quality! I literally thought the 5D was out of focus!
Upvote
0
Nakean said:
The curious thing is that if you use Magic Lantern RAW on the 5D3 the video suddenly shows remarkably more detail. Shadows are not a zero detail mush, areas of less than ultimate contrast are not a smeary mess, areas of ultimate contrast are crisp instead of slightly soft. Either DIGIC is godawful at video processing or they are applying some horrible 'consumer' settings or adding in a gaussian blur or something. 5D3 with ML RAW gives about the best HD quality in a DSLR. 5D3 without it is sooo 2009 quality, if even. Of course RAW video is a beast to deal with, kills your HD so fast.
Upvote
0
Mehhhh.
I am forever grateful to Canon, as I filmed a movie on the 5D2 called "The Battery" that was an indie success.
One of Canon's biggest successes, even though they've ignored my requests to test equipment, etc.
They just aren't doing anything interesting right now. I've got a C100 mk1 with an Atomos recorder and the whole rig is years old, yet, they aren't offering any significant reason to upgrade to anything else.
I'm a huge Csnon guy, don't get me wrong... I've shot two feature films with Canon... I just want to see a bigger push overall. I'm having to explain why I shoot Canon now, and it is getting harder to explain.
To the earlier poster about the Sigma ART lenses: I love them! Just ditched Zeiss for them and that is HUGE praise.
I am forever grateful to Canon, as I filmed a movie on the 5D2 called "The Battery" that was an indie success.
One of Canon's biggest successes, even though they've ignored my requests to test equipment, etc.
They just aren't doing anything interesting right now. I've got a C100 mk1 with an Atomos recorder and the whole rig is years old, yet, they aren't offering any significant reason to upgrade to anything else.
I'm a huge Csnon guy, don't get me wrong... I've shot two feature films with Canon... I just want to see a bigger push overall. I'm having to explain why I shoot Canon now, and it is getting harder to explain.
To the earlier poster about the Sigma ART lenses: I love them! Just ditched Zeiss for them and that is HUGE praise.
Upvote
0
TeT said:
I bought 35 art online it had focusing issue. Returned it, went to a local shop, tried couple lens and bought a 35 art that doesn't have any af issue. Used the lens 3 weeks and mind officially got blown. Went straight to the local shop, tried a few 50 art and bought one. Few months later, sold my 50L. The art lens is different league than 50L. There's nothing to even compare (Yah 1.4 vs 1.2 which is like nothing to me but art is holy grail in terms of sharpness). Future looks interesting with Canon reaching for consumer's wallet and other companies pushing the limit. Very interesting indeed.
Note: art lenses have zero focusing issue on Sony bodies and very low focusing issue on Nikon bodies. The complain mostly comes when it put onto canon bodies. Now you go figure why it's like that. I hope canon gets a good lesson for this in future.
Upvote
0
Policar said:
+1
This explicitly for YouTube bundle will do what it says on the tin very well. It isn't aimed at indie feature makers, tv documentaries or any other group for which it would be totally unsuitable.
And for the purpose for which this kit is advertised RAW video and Clog would actually be negatives and 4K wouldn't be much of an improvement (better resolution vs the need for more storage and processing power for people editing on a consumer laptop wouldn't come down on the more resolution side of things).
Whereas DPAF + touchscreen is a massive, massive positive.
Upvote
0
Policar said:
I think you're making excuses where you shouldn't be. I also shoot Canon. I own a 60D, I use a C100 mkII at work and I shot my first feature and a few shorts on an XL1 years ago. But let's not fool ourselves, for $2000 this 80D video package is a bad deal and you'd be a moron to buy it at that price when you can get an XC10 from Canon for the same price. Or a GH4 which is easier to shoot video with. I owned a GH1 and GH2, they are far easier to shoot video with than a ten series Canon. The EVF and the dedicated white balance button alone make that a fact, not even bringing up the better image.
As for youtube video bloggers, a DSLR really isn't the right tool at all. You'll want a handycam style camera with faster AF (due to the smaller sensor) and greater DOF so you don't have to worry as much about focus since you aren't manning the camera. Also with a camcorder you won't have to worry about the record time limit a Canon DSLR has (which the GH4 does not have here in the US).
So no, the 80D is not the right tool for youtube vloggers, nor is it the right tool these days for shoestring budget filmmakers who should seek the best quality for their productions (even if no one sees them), simply because their time is worth something. So why would you put all that time and energy into a production and record it with an inferior camera system like an 80D when you can shoot it with a 4K video friendly camera like a GH4 for less money? That doesn't make any sense and your over zealous Canon fanboyism isn't going to change that objective reality.
Upvote
0
I'm sorry. I don't mean to sound offensive, I just really don't understand fanboyism and how people can have such a religious dedication to a certain company and make excuses and try to rationalize certain things they do in a positive way.
I use Canon stuff, but I use it like I use anything, it's a tool. If there is a better tool for a better price, I'll use that instead, no matter who makes it. I've used a ton of camera brands in my life. I also try to use the right tool for the job. So I don't understand why people are making excuses for this 80D video package at $2000 when there are much better options out there at or below the price.
I use Canon stuff, but I use it like I use anything, it's a tool. If there is a better tool for a better price, I'll use that instead, no matter who makes it. I've used a ton of camera brands in my life. I also try to use the right tool for the job. So I don't understand why people are making excuses for this 80D video package at $2000 when there are much better options out there at or below the price.
Upvote
0
if that's the case, I wish canon had spent that money to develop a decent sensor instead. It's just long due now. 
roxics said:
You need to differentiate between someone thinking this kit is great (I don't), and recognizing why it exists (I do.)
I mean, it's just the "70D Video Creator Kit", updated with the new body. It's destined for immediate price reduction and Black Friday sales. Here's a camelcamelcamel price tracker of the 70D Kit, which plummets almost immediately:
http://camelcamelcamel.com/Canon-Creator-18-135mm-VIDEOMIC-Sandisk/product/B0125ULYWU?context=browse
Again, if asked, I wouldn't recommend this setup either, but it's really good marketing, and makes me wonder why Sony or Panasonic don't follow suit.
Attachments
Upvote
0
Even if we find someone interested in this new package and even recognizing that the initial price (B&H's $2,049 for example) for the package will be discounted significantly as time goes on, wow the initial price makes no sense (unless that 32GB card is way more expensive than a similar 16GB card):
At B&H, you can now buy the 80D along with the new 18-135 USM version lens for $1,599 (which, BTW, includes an extra third party battery (Value - $35.00) and a nice shoulder bag (Value - $35.00) - two items not included in the "Video Creator" kit)
Add the $149 PZ-E1 Power Zoom Adaptor for $149.
Add the Rode VideoMic Go for $99. (Hmm, does the Video Creator kit provide a better Rode mic? I think not).
Total: $1,849.00
I can't figure out whether I am missing something here or whether the Video Creator kit is missing something given that the Video Creator kit will be selling (assuming someone is buying) for $2,049.00.
At B&H, you can now buy the 80D along with the new 18-135 USM version lens for $1,599 (which, BTW, includes an extra third party battery (Value - $35.00) and a nice shoulder bag (Value - $35.00) - two items not included in the "Video Creator" kit)
Add the $149 PZ-E1 Power Zoom Adaptor for $149.
Add the Rode VideoMic Go for $99. (Hmm, does the Video Creator kit provide a better Rode mic? I think not).
Total: $1,849.00
I can't figure out whether I am missing something here or whether the Video Creator kit is missing something given that the Video Creator kit will be selling (assuming someone is buying) for $2,049.00.
Upvote
0
Similar threads
