Greg Joyce posted the text of a email response he received from
Canon, after he made a suggestion about doing a simple upgrade to the firmware the text states:

"Thank you for contacting Canon product support. We value you as a Canon
customer and appreciate the opportunity to assist you with your EOS 5D
Mark II.

There are currently no plans to add additional video support to the 5D
Mark II, however, future cameras may offer more features.

We have forwarded your suggestion through our Customer Feedback process."

See Greg's post here: http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/canon-eos-5d-mk-ii-hd/146718-5d-mark-ii-shutter-exposed-part-ii-3.html#post1042637

Assuming that was done with someone's authority at Canon, it sounds like they may have landed on a "no more" changes policy of the Canon 5D Mark II video capability.

Has anyone else received such notification. It seems strange we have heard nothing from Canon about an upcoming firmware update.

Thats cool, but in order to buy the Nikon thats most certainly in the pipeline I'll have to sell my Canon gear.

I'm not really trying to start a flame war, or an anti-Canon campaign. But from the standpoint of being owner, I just need to know where the resources need to go in terms of gear, software, and peripherals. I am wondering if anyone else has seen this type of statement coming out of Canon.

I love my Canon, I want my Canon - it's a good camera that makes pretty pictures.

But I also want it to behave in a controllable, predictable way.

I'm not dedicated to any one brand,and if Nikon fixes what Canon should have already fixed, I'll sell my Canon and move to a camera that offers a solution for my needs too.
Simple economics and business decision as a creative professional.

But boy.... I sure hope Canon gives us the VERY FEW things we all want/need. They would rule the world if they did.
Their decision-making process is baffling to me.

I've been saving my lens budget for after NAB. If they announce a solution for aperture control, I'll buy Canon lenses. If not, I'll buy Nikon lenses.

It's as simple as that.

A couple of days ago there was a slightly different spin on that rumor posted elsewhere on the net. I posted about it here, but it was deleted because of the anti-rumor policy of this board.

If you go searching around you'll probably find it.

I want everyone to know that I do not mean to cast doubt on Greg Joyce's post and email quote. I just thought the communication might signify an important change in Canon communications with 5D users, and I am only wondering if others are receiving similar notices based on their inquiry. It would seem that the statement Greg received if repeated to by Canon support staff, would indicate that Canon has come to a conclusion on what it will do with respect to user's request.

Greg, I apologize if I inferred anything other than that interest in the brining up the email you quoted.

I'm not really trying to start a flame war...We don't do those here anyway.

I posted about it here, but it was deleted because of the anti-rumor policy of this board.Our policy simply states that "rumors" go no further than Area 51 (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/area-51/), that's all.

Besides, the subject of Canon putting a 5D2-like sensor in a dedicated video
camera has long been a subject of discussion around here... it's nothing new.
The rumor mills elsewhere on the web probably got the idea from us anyway.

Besides, the subject of Canon putting a 5D2-like sensor in a dedicated video
camera has long been a subject of discussion around here... it's nothing new.
The rumor mills elsewhere on the web probably got the idea from us anyway.
Well, if we're going to be an incubation point for a rumor, it might as well be a really good one. :)

One thing for sure, Canon knows that the 5D MkII will cause a commotion at NAB. At CES, there were only a few of us asking for feature upgrades and wondering about the future of big sensors in pro/prosumer cameras. At NAB, they'll be swarmed. Their reps on the floor need to have an official response to the questions at hand. Even with an official response, there will be some "spirited" conversations.

If Canon announces a firmware update and a next gen camera, they'll be able to tout their technology and sell products. If their only answers are "no" and "silence", they will have some major distractions getting in the way of their product marketing efforts.

I would say that the best indicator for Canon's future actions would be their most recent product release.

500D - 20FPS

Enough said.

Do you think that company that thinks it's ok to release a 20fps video camera is going to be adding features and functionality to a camera that is already on the market?

I say this being a 5DM2 owner who desperately hopes they will prove me wrong.

I just think they are taking the obstructionist/head in the sand/RIAA/MPAA -like-approach of responding to a clear need in the marketplace as a 'threat' to be confronted. It's a shame.


M

-- I should add... The great news for us is that the marketplace solves this. We will eventually get the camera we want. Definitely. It just may have a Nikon, Panasonic, or Red logo on the front of it.

But they haven't made a 20fps video camera. They've made a still camera with a 20fps video mode -- that's a huge difference, the fact that it's first and foremost a still photo camera. And that's coming from a previous product history of still photo cameras with 15fps and 10fps video modes, and it's one of several camera makers that have included 15fps and 10fps video modes before.

If you've actually seen the 20fps video samples from the Rebel T1i, and if you consider it for what it really is -- a low-end consumer product designed to compete with the Nikon D90 -- then you'd realize what a complete non-issue that particular frame rate is. The Rebel T1i wasn't intended for filmmakers or video professionals, two specialized groups which don't constitute a measurable slice of the Rebel's market.

There's certainly nothing wrong with using one in a professional capacity... I made photographs with a Rebel XT that were published in a coffee table book that you can find in any Barnes & Noble or Borders in the country... but that's not what the Rebel is made for. So there's really no valid complaint about its professional application. The Rebel is just barely a real camera. Sure, it's a D-SLR, but it's plastic and it's at the bottom of the D-SLR food chain. That it even has 1080 HD is remarkable, and people who buy it are either going to love the video mode or they won't use it at all. To those who complain about its 20fps, and I'll bet that a lot of these folks haven't even looked at the clips, I say "so what." What were you expecting in a dirt cheap, entry-level SLR? Get a real video camera.

And no, you really can't predict any future actions based on their most recent product release. They have one division which makes five tiers of D-SLRs, of which the Rebel is at the very bottom. They have a completely separate division -- different designers, engineers, etc. -- for video cameras.

But they haven't made a 20fps video camera. They've made a still camera with a 20fps video mode -- that's a huge difference,

Great point Chris!

I guess I should have said 'they decided that 20fps was an acceptable frame rate to include in a product with video functionality'.

I have no complaint with them choosing whatever they want as far as codecs and frame rates. I was just trying to draw a conclusion about their future choices as a manufacturer. I may be too cynical, but I am guessing that 20fps was not a technical limitation of the camera. Do you think they could have squeezed 4 more frames per second out to get to the nearest 'standard' frame rate. I mean, those 'standard' rates have been established for a reason - to simplify workflow, post production and delivery. For this reason, I consider their products somewhat defective by design.

Even if they have different divisions, they can't have it both ways. They market the camera with 'HD'. The product page for the 500D says "Full HD video capture at 1920 x 1080 resolution"

Well, what can you call 'Full HD'? Do you think 20fps is what expect from a 'Full HD' product. How about 18fps or 3fps or 1fps. Is my iPhone now capable of 'Full HD video capture at 1920x1080'? It just doesn't pass the smell test for me.

I agree with your approach of 'whatever works'. I have shot several shows for broadcast using some completely non-standard devices. The were news/crime shows, so the compelling material justified its use. 20fps can be converted and used for absolutely anything. But imagine if they sold you a Rebel that only shot images in a triangle instead of a rectangle because they didn't want it to compete with the 40D. Sure, you could center-extract the image and still make it in your coffee table book. But it would not make you feel like Canon was giving you the best they could.

Look, I really like my 5D. I don't think Canon owes any of us anything beyond the products they choose to sell.. I just think, based on my personal observations as a tech consumer, that they aren't showing any indications of giving Chris B. or me what we are hoping for in the near future. It's an obvious guess that they are throwing everything into an XL body with a EOS mount and a CMOS sensor. I am sure that product would rock. It would also probably be worth the 10K it is likely to cost.

Someone will see an opening there and aim for the near-5K market. My money is on Panasonic (although I am not crazy about micro 4/3s lenses). They have shown a better sense of giving the market what they are clamoring for - 24p then Tapeless shooting. But we'll see.

I am happily shooting with my 5D, XhA1 (with Letus), even video mode on my SD880 powershot when it makes sense. I will be even happier when one of these companies releases the camera we all know they are now capable of producing.

And people wonder how once mighty companies like GM went into the ditch. They kept making vehicles that GM perceived that the public wanted. As long as the customer bought them, GM stayed fat and happy. In the mean time, the Japanese made fuel-efficient, durable and safe cars. Eventually, time ran out on GM.

If Canon wants to put out cameras that Canon thinks that the customer needs, eventually, some other company or companies will put Canon out of business also. The electronics market is more volatile than the automobile industry, so Canon could crash in a matter of years.

Not likely, Jay... the Canon Rebel XSi was by far the single most popular D-SLR sold last year... it alone accounted for one out of every twenty D-SLRs bought worldwide (source (http://www.slashgear.com/two-big-continue-to-stomp-digital-slr-market-in-japan-3128291/)), out of a large number of models to choose from. Canon and Nikon together have a combined 80% market share in the photo industry, so it's safe to say that both companies know how to put out the cameras that customers want.

The analogy to GM, a mismanaged American automotive corporation, simply doesn't hold water, especially compared to a Japanese optical manufacturer (there really is no comparison). What many people reading this site don't realize is that they're *not* the target market for inexpensive, mass-market cameras like the Rebel. The readership of DV Info Net combined with all of the other popular online communities covering the filmmaker and videographer markets together don't begin to equal a fraction of a percent of all the people who will buy the Rebel T1i.

Even if everyone here united in the thought that the video mode (or any other aspect of that camera) is inadequate, they'd be overwhelmingly drowned out by the masses of consumers who will readily and happily buy it -- that's the big picture.

I want everyone to know that I do not mean to cast doubt on Greg Joyce's post and email quote. I just thought the communication might signify an important change in Canon communications with 5D users, and I am only wondering if others are receiving similar notices based on their inquiry. It would seem that the statement Greg received if repeated to by Canon support staff, would indicate that Canon has come to a conclusion on what it will do with respect to user's request.

Greg, I apologize if I inferred anything other than that interest in the brining up the email you quoted.

Chris, thank you but there's no reason to apologize; please don't give it another thought.

I thought it might be a change for Canon, too. Unfortunately the only change is in my hope/belief they'd do a video firmware fix, even a modest one.

Well, what can you call 'Full HD'? Do you think 20fps is what expect from a 'Full HD' product. There is no official (ATSC) definition of "Full HD." That's the beauty of a marketing term... you can make it mean whatever you want (and Wikipedia is no authority, by the way -- it might be a majority, but it's not necessarily right). The broad consensus of the term "Full HD" is that it simply delineates a 1920x1080 resolution from 1440x1080, 1280x1080, or 720x1280. It does *not* always imply 1080p since it commonly refers to 1080i. Some will claim that it means 1080p60, but that's not even a current broadcast standard... so frame rate doesn't really figure into it. Sony and others use it to describe 1080i.

Not only doesn't frame rate play a part in how you define Full HD, but neither does bit rate, or compression. Some camcorders record Full HD at 17mbps, but that's not always what comes down through a satellite dish... some HD channels are delivered at higher bit rates than others. Since there's no official technical definition for "Full HD" beyond the display size of 1920x1080, then you can tag along whatever frame rate and bit rate you can get away with.

As far as 20fps is concerned, it doesn't matter what you call it -- all that matters is how you use it (or whether you use it). Personally, I probably wouldn't use it for anything other than casual home use... but then, that's exactly what it's intended for. Once again, a lot of noise that's being thrown around about 20fps in the Rebel is making a mountain out of a molehill. If you actually *look* at it -- if you download the clips and watch them -- there's really nothing at all wrong with it from a consumer point of view. The vast majority of people that are going to buy this camera aren't worried in the slightest about workflow, post production and delivery... all they're going to do with it, if anything, is put it on YouTube.

And we should all be aware that the Rebel isn't "the best Canon can give us." It's simply the most affordable. There's four more tiers of D-SLR where the quality keeps going up. I would imagine that the three remaining models that don't have video yet probably will eventually.

I am only wondering if others are receiving similar notices based on their inquiry. Likewise, I'm just as curious. Greg's message comes as no surprise to me at all... disappointing, sure, but definitely not surprising. Still would like to know if anyone else has received the same sort of communication.

This statement contradicts an earlier comment by another Canon support rep indicating that they are working on a firmware update.

I don't think Canon product support reps would be a good source for this information. They probably don't know any more than we do.

Well, I decided to ask Canon support directly about the status of a firmware upgrade for video. It looks to me that there is a new hard line. Here is what I sent, and what was received in response.


Dear Canon:

What is the status of any new firmware update for the Canon 5D Mark II. There has been some indication Canon would be offering a new upgrade in April, and that it could address some lack of video control issues.

Chris Barcellos

I received the following response:

Dear Chris Barcellos:

Thank you for contacting Canon product support. We value you as a Canon
customer and appreciate the opportunity to assist you with your EOS 5D
Mark II.

There are no plans to add additional video support the the EOS 5D Mark
II, however, future cameras may offer additional video features. If we
do find issues with the camera that require a firmware update, it will
be available for download from Canon EOS SLR Camera Systems (http://www.canoneos.com) . We do not release
firmware updates that change the functionality of the camera.

We hope this information is helpful to you. Please let us know if we
can be of any further assistance with your EOS 5D Mark II.

Thank you for choosing Canon.

Sincerely,

Erik
Technical Support Representative


Seems pretty clear to me...

"We do not release firmware updates that change the functionality of the camera."

In that case we do not purchase Canon lenses.

We hope this information is helpful to you. Please let us know if we can be of any further assistance with your marketing of lenses to owners of the EOS 5D Mark II.

Thank you for helping us to choose Nikon.

Sincerely,

Jon
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Owner

...Sony and others use it to describe 1080i.Chris, it's true that Full HD is a marketing term, rather than a formal definition. That said, in the TV business, "Full HD" meant a 1080p panel. There are no 1080i flat panels.

The problem came when people asked where the 1080p inputs were. The purists felt that you could only call a TV with 1080p inputs a "1080p" TV. Marketing people started to call those TVs "Full HD" to avoid that argument. In the early days of marketing 1080p, there was a lot of hand wringing.

In the end, "1080p" became the dominant marketing term, regardless of the input capabilities. Truth be told, if you have a good 3:2 pulldown detector, you can watch 24 fps movies that are perfectly progressive from a 1080i input, such as an ATSC transmission.

Anyway, Canon calling a 20 Hz camera "Full HD" is yet more watering down of this marketing term. It's certainly not the *full* frame rate of any HD standard. But then again, it's just a marketing term. Canon isn't hiding the fact that it's 20 fps, so I don't have a beef with it.

Well, I am glad for one thing, we at least know where we stand, and what steps we need to take, to make things work... Its a shame, Canon could have made it at least a bit easier on us by giving us some in camera sound control... but at least we know now.

Well, I am glad for one thing, we at least know where we stand [...]

Actually, I'm not sure we do. It might all be a bit of that dreaded "Osborne effect" Osborne effect - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_effect) why Canon now seem quite consistent (i.e., tight-lipped) about their future releases, (which is often an indicator for good business).

-- peer

I made photographs with a Rebel XT that were published in a coffee table book that you can find in any Barnes & Noble or Borders in the country... but that's not what the Rebel is made for.

We are in the middle of the worst crisis in a lot of years. Chris, you recognize that equipement can be used in a way that was not the "intended" mode. And you can get results, did you ask less money for the pics in the book because the camera was all plastic??? I am sure your pics were good because YOU made them, the tool is necessary, but it's just a tool.

We are living in a transition from mass-markets to long-tail markets. We can't all love the same things. So companies should try to please not just the mass-market, but also the minorities. Canon is ignoring (insulting?) all the PAL people (which is not minor market, btw).

Manufacturers are not always the most creative people in the world. They sometimes aim for "grandeur" and deliver mediocrity. Or the opposite. In any case, neither crippled products nor inteligence-less management are good long time solutions. Remember Sony ignoring MP3?? DVD protection code broke in 24 hours?? Useless DVD regions?? Super Audio CD and DVD Audio war, which won?? Do I have to go on??

Canon just need to change a couple of lines of code and they can at least give 25p to all PAL users in the world. I love(d) Canon, but if they fail to do this I'll try to find my video recording needs with another company.

Nowadays we vote with our wallets and it would be nice people buy products because the things they DO, not what they CAN/COULD do...

In this day and age companies that refuse to listen to customers suggestions will fail, be they an american motor company or a japanese lens manufacturer. I find it completely believable that Canon will not add manual control to the firmware, I think it is an awful decision, but I can't think of a time when canon has provided direct support to their customers, often they listen to customers by releasing a new camera. This appears to me to mean that there is a greater likely hood of another camera be is a 1d mark whatever or an actual video camera that will offer the solutions that we would like for them to currently make. This is a sound short sighted archaic business decision that will continue to erode canon's "professional video" market share and lead to the closing of that already diminished product line.

For those of us that would like an update we're better off making friends with a hacker then wasting anymore time discussing this with canon. I'm curious if a hacked firmware were released if as a result an official firmware would be released.

... in the TV business, "Full HD" meant a 1080p panel. There are no 1080i flat panels.I acknowledge that, but in the camcorder business, "Full HD" has also meant 1080i (per Sony, Canon and other manufacturers). My point is that there is no consistency, thus no hard definition of the term.

...why Canon now seem quite consistent (i.e., tight-lipped) about their future releases... Replace the word "now" with the word "always" and you have an accurate statement. Canon has always been quite consistent (i.e., tight-lipped) about their future releases. They never announce anything that's more than 90 days away from shipping. Nor do they post on rumor sites, just so you know. ;-)

Chris, you recognize that equipement can be used in a way that was not the "intended" mode. And you can get results, did you ask less money for the pics in the book because the camera was all plastic?No, I asked for less money because the publisher knew that I had never sold a photograph before. But that doesn't matter, I was thrilled just to have the photos running. I made the sale based on the quality of the images; the equipment I used was never discussed. The point I'm trying to make about the plastic camera and using consumer gear for professional applications is that I knew the limitations of the gear and I chose to use it anyway. I didn't complain about it; instead I made it work. And then when I had the opportunity, I replaced it with a better camera.

So companies should try to please not just the mass-market, but also the minorities. But they already do that... for example Canon sells five tiers of D-SLR, and Nikon just as many if not more, each level corresponding to smaller and tighter niche markets.

Canon is ignoring (insulting?) all the PAL people (which is not minor market, btw).I fully agree with you here. The lack of 25p on these things is a real shame.

Hi all,

I am sure this may have been discussed before. I am also the proud owner of a 5D2 which has been giving me lots of fun time on the video side of things (Not to mention the amazing photos it takes). I am wondering if the use of a MF nikon lens with an adaptor on the 5D2 wouldn't help a little in terms of getting some (or alot more) control over what the 5D2 is offering stock. I am going this route.

Is there a technical issue here with the setup that may be the reason this is not the right thing to do (Beside the possibility of damaging my very expensive 5D2? Thanks.

Canon just need to change a couple of lines of code and they can at least give 25p to all PAL users in the world. I love(d) Canon, but if they fail to do this I'll try to find my video recording needs with another company.

Nowadays we vote with our wallets and it would be nice people buy products because the things they DO, not what they CAN/COULD do...


The problem with this approach is you may be cutting off your nose to spite your face. Let's be realistic. I would not try to sell this camera to someone who is going to shoot a major motion picture. It would be ludicrous. And yet, I am thankful that Canon has introduced something I can actually get some images out of that have the look a feel of 35mm film. When I bought this camera, I was told about its shortcoming.... no 24p, limited users control, etc, etc., And yet, for $ 2700, I had a whole new prespective in my hands and images far superior to the 35mm adapter stuff I had been able to turn out. I jumped at it.

You can say what you want about Canon. Until two years back, I did not own a Canon. Then Canon introduced me to 24p, with the tiny HV20-- for less than $1,000. And now, Canon is introducing me to full frame 35mm film making for under $3,000.

And about taking your wallet elsewhere, get a nice big one. I will wager that once the guts of this camera are put into a video camera by Canon's video division, or by any other manufacturer, you will be looking at a $ 12,000 list price. Sure it will have most of the bells and whistles, but the image rolling out it won't be much different from the 5D's. It will still be that chip (or one similar) and your lens, coupled with your vision that will show on the screen.

Hi all,

I am sure this may have been discussed before. I am also the proud owner of a 5D2 which has been giving me lots of fun time on the video side of things (Not to mention the amazing photos it takes). I am wondering if the use of a MF nikon lens with an adaptor on the 5D2 wouldn't help a little in terms of getting some (or alot more) control over what the 5D2 is offering stock. I am going this route.

Is there a technical issue here with the setup that may be the reason this is not the right thing to do (Beside the possibility of damaging my very expensive 5D2? Thanks.

Alex, it is a partial solution, and the one I am using. However, Canon owners may already have a large kit of lenses. And image stabilization can be important with this camera too. So you can understand the basic desire to have more control over exposure no matter what direction you go.

Alex, it is a partial solution, and the one I am using. However, Canon owners may already have a large kit of lenses. And image stabilization can be important with this camera too. So you can understand the basic desire to have more control over exposure no matter what direction you go.

Definitely. I would love to see a firmware update for manual control. Hope that will come soon.

Whether this will make Canon move to make the changes, only time will tell.

Alex, it is a partial solution, and the one I am using. However, Canon owners may already have a large kit of lenses. And image stabilization can be important with this camera too. So you can understand the basic desire to have more control over exposure no matter what direction you go.

I'm in the same boat. I'm using Nikon lenses for video control, but would prefer to buy Canon lenses. The lack of aperture control is a killer though.

Just last night I was taking a photo of one of my cats (with mostly black fur - a difficult subject) in low light with a Nikon 85mm f/1.8 lens. I used Live View with exposure simulation, manual focus (using 10x mag) and manual control. It was also handheld with no IS - at 1/30. I got a good one good shot, but it was a pain in the butt. With a Canon, I could turn on IS, use autofocus, and simply use shutter priority. Snap, snap, snap.

That said, I will NEVER shoot video without setting the aperture myself. Having to pull the lens, remove mylar, replace the lens, set the aperture, remove the lens, insert the mylar, and attach the lens is a bit much. And after that I still have to mess with the camera to lock the shutter and ISO that I want.

With more money, I'd have a case of Nikons for video and a case of Canons for photos.

I don't have that kind of money.

Nice thing about Nikons, is you can still get them pretty cheap on EBay. Some pretty good buys on many of the lenses for any where from $ 75 to $ 200, if you are patient.

...The analogy to GM, a mismanaged American automotive corporation, simply doesn't hold water, especially compared to a Japanese optical manufacturer (there really is no comparison). What many people reading this site don't realize is that they're *not* the target market for inexpensive, mass-market cameras like the Rebel.

People and experts said the same thing that you said about Canon, about GM and not that long ago, as I recall. My comments weren't entirely directed at the Rebel, but rather the general attitude that I perceive in Canon's marketing vs. it's historically impressive engineering. Warren Buffett said it best on TV recently:

"First come the innovators, who see opportunities that others don’t. Then come the imitators, who copy what the innovators have done. And then come the idiots, whose avarice undoes the very innovations they are trying to use to get rich."

Canon started out as a Leica imitator. As they gained expertise and market share, they became an innovator. And I agree with you, their mass market products like the Rebel and the HV series of consumer camcorders brought this innovative thinking to a wide audience. Further, the 5D2 is a diamond with a few, small imperfections. But what I also see happening over the last year is that the Buffett-termed "idiots" are gradually taking charge at Canon. How else could you explain not marketing a version of the 5D2 with 25p for Europe and other PAL countries?

And selling any camera or camcorder for more than $100 US that has a frame rate of 20 fps is no big deal to people who might be buying the device. But it opens up Canon to ridicule by the very people it has catered to for decades. And this elite market influences public opinion. When GM was originally faced with an invasion of small cars, it's response was the Corvair, a clunky, poorly-made VW Bug clone, that was attacked by a so-called expert of his time, Ralph Nader.

Now all that could be termed "honest mistakes" by Canon. But then you have the corporate response to public inquiries to contend with and explain. They read like, "Go fly a kite. We know best, not you. You're complaints and ideas for improvements are not welcomed. Why don't you just wait until we come out with a new model, that fixes everything." Maybe that's not what Canon means, but that's how people are interpreting that. And the people that they are influencing with this attitude will influence the entire market.

Jay, you are interpolating Canon's standing in the digital imaging field from a tiny slice of Canon's recent history of products and innovations. Give it some time and see which way it will go.

Technically speaking, the Sigma DP1 was the first consumer digital still camera that could capture shallow DOF video due to its APS-C sensor, but the thing only recorded to MPEG at 320x240 30fps.. Last Summer on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/2542237) Was there an big outcry at Sigma for not integrating a large movie mode? Nope, so I guess only if you start to deliver features that inch the camera closer to professional usability, do you then make yourself open for ridicule.

Cameras are relatively trivial things compared to other durable goods. It only takes the release of one good model to put the manufacture on the map. Canon has had way more excellent products than duds over the years. Given that you are talking specifically about this brand new category of still/video hybrid products. You can't paint the gloom and doom picture for an established brand like Canon because of a few small bumps along the way.

...Nope, so I guess only if you start to deliver features that inch the camera closer to professional usability, do you then make yourself open for ridicule.


Yang, actually, you've made a very interesting point, which you may have said in jest, but I think it is true. I don't know how carefully you follow the computer side of the electronics industry, but I'm assuming that the computer that you are using either has an nVidia or ATI (AMD) video card. And that same computer probably has either an Intel or an AMD CPU installed. In the case of both GPUs and CPUs, each company makes most of it's money from low end and mid range products. But the real battleground over public opinion is on the high end. It's what bloggers blog about and experts opine about. If your high end product is not so "high-end", your whole product line suffers. On the computer side of things, it's a constant battle to produce the ultimate flagship product, even if you only sell a few of them, relatively speaking.

To put this in perspective, the 5D2 is the flagship of the prosumer DSLR line and the new Rebel is the flagship of the entire consumer digital camera line for Canon.

So what you said, is probably true. sink your flagship and the whole fleet is affected.

To put this in perspective, the 5D2 is the flagship of the prosumer DSLR line and the new Rebel is the flagship of the entire consumer digital camera line for Canon.

So what you said, is probably true. sink your flagship and the whole fleet is affected.

Would it sink though?

Yes 1080P @ 20fps is weird, but the D90 only records 720P.. and the Rebel records 720P @ 30fps, which is very usable. Only a small subset of the people (low budget indie filmmakers) relative to Rebel's target demographic will care about 24P. So from that perspective, Canon has delivered a product that is well suited for their target demographic.

So no, I don't think it will sink - that's my whole point. Unless someone comes out with a competing product that is equality appealing and addresses our needs, we'll just have to live by what these camera companies puts out and they will not fail/sink because we're not 100% satisfied with what they offer - we simply have no other choice.. They will only sink if they fail at putting out products that do not to excel at their core purpose. HD video on the 5D2 is not its core purpose. In fact, I'm willing to bet you that Canon has lost A LOT more revenue and gain much more negative reputation from the 1D3's focus issues, than anything the regarding the 5D2 or the Rebel.

The GH1 will have manual control and 24P which is good, but its lens selection is poor at best so we don't have a superior alternative yet!

Just last night I was taking a photo of one of my cats (with mostly black fur - a difficult subject) in low light with a Nikon 85mm f/1.8 lens. I used Live View with exposure simulation, manual focus (using 10x mag) and manual control. It was also handheld with no IS - at 1/30. I got a good one good shot, but it was a pain in the butt. With a Canon, I could turn on IS, use autofocus, and simply use shutter priority. Snap, snap, snap.Why not use a Canon lens for photos? I can understand why your choice of Nikon lenses for manual aperture control when shooting video but insisting on using a Nikon lens for stills & then complaining about the limitations is a bit perverse.

Cheers

Nigel

I can see how you interpreted Jon's post, but I think he meant something else, namely that he'd prefer to to invest in a full set of quality Canon lenses for video and stills. Because Canon has crippled aperture control in video mode, he must buy Nikkors for video AND Canon for stills.

I've done the same thing myself. I have half a dozen Nikkors which I use exclusively for video, and a few Canon lenses I use exclusively for stills. If Canon gave us manual control over video, I'd sell my Nikkors tomorrow and buy a couple of L series lenses.

As it is, if Nikon comes out with a replacement for the D300 or D700 with good video functionality and a decent codec, I'll sell my 5D and be all set to go. In fact, this seems to be a more likely outcome that Canon coming up with the firmware fix, but I hope I'm wrong.

Nigel,

Josh has it exactly right. Given the money, I'd buy both sets of lenses. Given that my budget doesn't allow that, I'm choosing Nikons, since video is my priority.

If you want to take stills you really should pony up for at least one Canon EOS lens. My 5DII came in a kit with the 24-105 f4L IS USM which is a stellar lens for snaps.

For creative video my collection of half a dozen manual Nikon lenses cost less on eBay than just one new or even a decent used Canon lens which I suspect is a major reason that many people are investing in Nikon rather than Canon lenses for video. The old manual Nikon lenses are just so much cheaper to buy.

Cheers

Nigel

If you want to take stills you really should pony up for at least one Canon EOS lens. I've got the 70-300mm F/4-5.6 IS, but I'm finding that I want to use the Nikon primes over the zoom in a lot of cases, even if I have to set up the shot old school.

To way in on the lens discussion, i purchased the 24-70 canon L lens which i love, but will most likely buy zeiss nikon-mount lenses for the remainder of the life of the camera. but i do love the 24-70 i shot for 2 or 3 hours last night and got some amazing photos in very low natural light.

That is the one canon lens I might buy besides the 50mm 1.8 I got just to have something to play with. Everything else will be Nikon/Zeiss for the day I probably switch to a Nikon body that has manual control with video. I don't see that happening with Canon.

The issue I most want to see addressed in a firmware upgrade are these horrible line-skipping and demosaicing artifacts I am getting. :(

Anytime I shoot golden water at sunset, I get horrendous blue/magenta artifacts.

Anytime I shoot golden water at sunset, I get horrendous blue/magenta artifacts.You don't need new firmware, you need an optical filter. To fix it digitally, the sensor would have to be three times as fast. (It looks like they're sampling every third line or so.) The DSP would need enough power to do some vertical digital filtering as well. I would guess that we won't see this in HDSLRs for at least five years.

For now, I find that a Tiffen Soft/fx #1 works well in the 85mm - 105mm range.

Also, the artifact you're seeing might be due to the lens as well. Color fringing can occur on details that are slightly out of focus. The following link shows Purple Fringing and Longitudinal Chromatic Aberrations (LoCA):
Nikkor AF 85mm f/1.4D - Review / Test Report (http://www.photozone.de/nikon--nikkor-aps-c-lens-tests/220-nikkor-af-85mm-f14d-review--test-report?start=1)

Using a Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 on a test pattern, the magenta/green fringes were terrible. I found that, rather than focusing with sharpness, it was more effective to hit focus by splitting the difference between the green side and the magenta side of the artifact.

Anyway, you might give some Soft/fx filters a try. In general, I'd go for #0 for a 200mm, #1 for 100/85, #2 for 50, and so on. Your results might vary, depending on the physical length of the lens and diameter of the filter. I found that a 52mm soft/fx #1 did nothing on a 24mm, didn't do enough on a 50mm, and was ever so slightly too aggressive on a Nikon 105mm f/2.8 AF Micro.

http://img6.imageshack.us/img6/2914/86661481hu7.jpg

This is the type of artifacting I'm talking about. It occurs regardless of the lens I use, including the EF 24L. The bottom pic is a "corrected" version using a gaussian, masked blur on chroma.

Would a filter help with this? Is it essentially going to soften my 1080p?

Would a filter help with this? Is it essentially going to soften my 1080p?

Yes, a filter will definitely help. It needs to be done optically, rather than in post, as you've experienced.

The 5D MkII has an optical low pass filter that's optimized for it's 3,744 lines as a still camera. We need something that's optimized for 1,080 lines.

Unfortunately, we can't get a brickwall filter that allows full resolution at 1,080 lines, yet filters out 100% of aliasing at 1,081 lines and above. It's probably more reasonable to expect a filter to pass 1,080, yet filter 1,500 and above - or to pass 720 lines, and filter 1,081. The first case would be sharp at 1080 and would cut aliasing in half, but would not stop it entirely. The second case would stop all aliasing, and would be soft at 1080p, but would be perfect with Vimeo's 720p.

You might try a Soft/fx #1 on a 50mm lens, if you want 1,080 resolution and a bit less aliasing. Go with a Soft/fx #2 on a 50mm lens for virtually no aliasing, sacrificing resolution.

Tiffen also makes some filters that reduce contrast and perform anti-alias filtering that are made specifically to make video look less digital. I haven't tried them, but these could be a nice solution.

Note that RED offers really high resolution in their upcoming cameras. The idea is to shoot, say, 3k and end up with 2k or 1080p. There's no aliasing at 3k, but it's soft. Scale it down, and the result should be excellent.

In the discussion as to whether the 5D is primarily a still or video camera... in regards to its optical low pass filter, it's definitely primarily a still camera.

Thanks for helping me with this.

Yes, I'm planning to buy a Red DSMC. I just want to be able to shoot usable 1080p on the 5D2 in the meantime.

Any chance that the firmware upgrade might address this issue? is it even possible to fix with software/firmware?

Any chance that the firmware upgrade might address this issue? is it even possible to fix with software/firmware?

It's not even remotely possible. Well, technically, it is possible, but it's about as difficult as a firmware that enables time travel, world peace, and anti-gravity. :)