"Equipped with an 18.1-megapixel full-frame 24mm x 36mm Canon CMOS sensor,
the camera records 8-bit 4:2:2 Motion JPEG 4K video to the camera’s CF memory
card at 24 frames-per-second (fps) or Full HD 1920 x 1080 video at selectable frame
rates from 24p to 60p, making it possible for next-generation visual expression with
even higher image-quality and resolution performance."

The full, official press release is located at:

Canon USA Introduces EOS-1D Digital SLR Camera Featuring 4K at DVInfo.net (http://www.dvinfo.net/news/canon-usa-introduces-eos-1d-digital-slr-camera-featuring-4k.html)

It was exciting reading the spec - until I got to the $15,000 bit. Ouch!

Wow. Killer cameras.

I guess Canon is really serious about getting the upper ends of the market.

It just strikes me as weird that it was the whole low budget DSLR movement that actually got Canon into this arena in the first place; but that is the very demographic that they are now neglecting (I'm talking price here).

Anyhow, hopefully there will be a trickle-down effect into the next generation T4 or T5. We'll see where that goes eventually.

But for now the DSLR movement looks like it will have to rely on Sony and Panasonic to deliver the next great cost effective camera.....

If I had 15,000 to spend on a video camera, it definitely wouldn't be that one.

I seriously doubt it'll be $15k. Remember what happened
with the C300... they initially said $20k, but had planned
all along to sell it for $16k. Same thing here, I'll bet.

Also, I don't think they're "neglecting" the lower markets.
These are NAB announcements after all. The high-end pro
gear is indicated for now. Prosumer, etc. to follow later.

MJPEG is kind of a dealbreaker. It also sounds like they're sticking to H.264 for full HD video. (4:2:0 was the clue)

"The camera’s ability to record 8-bit 4:2:2 4K and 8-bit 4:2:0 Full HD video to CF cards eliminates the need for an external recorder and enables workflows with increased mobility."

Yes Jack, very few details on the internal codecs. What kind of 4K quality is possible writing mjpeg to CF cards?

Smart move by Canon to completely differentiate their products. This doesn't undercut the C300 market at all. Apart from the mount, the cameras could hardly be more different.

Missing: EVF, movable LCD, xlrs, nds, 1080 422 codec, SDI, video form factor, zebras!!

But a full-frame sensor, 4K video and 18K stills. Interesting proposition.

Well, it's what I expected but not at the price I expected. Even assuming that it will street at $13k-$14k... fails to rouse excitement.

What kind of 4K quality is possible writing to CF cards?

RED was doing this four years ago with the RED One.

It was exciting reading the spec - until I got to the $15,000 bit.

I seriously doubt it'll be $15k. Remember what happened with the C300... they initially said $20k, but had planned all along to sell it for $16k. Same thing here, I'll bet.

Let's hope so -- I can handle tops $10k, no way $15k (I need both my kidneys).

-- peer

I seriously doubt it'll be $15k. Remember what happened
with the C300... they initially said $20k, but had planned
all along to sell it for $16k. Same thing here, I'll bet.

Also, I don't think they're "neglecting" the lower markets.
These are NAB announcements after all. The high-end pro
gear is indicated for now. Prosumer, etc. to follow later.

But what purpose would announcing a higher price serve, when it's cheaper prices that rouse the rabble?

Double bluff?

How would I know, Mark... I'm just a reporter here.

In all seriousness, I think it's just a way to take a bit of the sting
out of the "real" price. As in, announce it at an outrageous price,
then lower it later on so that it seems like a favor even though it's
still overpriced. My biggest complaint of Canon over the years has
been that they are consistently overpriced by about 20%.

It doesn't surprise me that Canon is more expensive. They don't have the same economies of scale that Panasonic and Sony have. Compared to those mammoths, Canon is a tiny company.

I'm a huge Canon fan and the last few months have been amazing!

C300? Awesome. Still the camera I crave most.

C500? Even more awesome for the ultra high end guys.

1DX-C? Wow.

Do I have little quibbles here and there? Sure. But Canon is just rocking it lately.

I understand that there are certain economies of scale for Canon to maintain the same 1D body, but still is a product that doesnt make sense to me.

If I'm a pro photographer why I should pay over double the price of 1Dx essentially for uncompressed HD out, and 1080/60p? Given that the claimed on board compression of 1Dx is very high, clean video out is unnecessary for a photographer turned occasional videographer. Not to mention that for 2/3 of the price, you get D4+D800+ext recorder, that can cater almost all your needs.

If I'm video professional, why I should compromise my work with DSLR form factor and still can't get more than uncompressed 8bit 422 video out, although I paid $15Κ for it? Ok I also get compressed 8bit MJPEG 4K @ ONLY 24p*, but I don't see any real need for that option. If I want to shoot a 4K feature, I need more than that and for everything else is an overkill.

If I'm both I can buy a 1Dx and a FS700 and have two cameras and more video functionality for the same price (apart from on board 4K recording).

Didn't make sense 6 months ago when it was announced, still does not!


*the lack of 25p is crucial for European markets.

As far as I know, weatherproof 4k is brand new.

That alone is kind of cool.

I'm with Robert...

It's a good time to be in the biz... It wasn't that long ago when cameras with a fraction of the resolution, cost 4 times as much. Never mind editing work stations...

My next purchase may just be the 5Dmk3, based on my current needs, and bang for the buck. But the C300 would fill 95% of my expected needs over the next 5 years. But the C500... well, damn...

It's nice too see Canon bringing out some great options. Especially knowing that the glass is compatible across all the bodies.

It struck me that looking at Canon's line from the top, there are these modular DSLR/camcorder hybrids and then as you go down the line, they turn into DSLRs. Other than the XF30x, the Canon "video camera" line-up above $3k isn't camcorders but DSLRs: (5DM3, 1D-X, 1D-C).

Ever since Canon combined the DSLR and video folks into one, it seems the video contingent has been relegated to red-headed step child status. The Cinema types on here seem to LOVE this new business model and revel in the lower prices compared to what they are used to paying.

Canon put a red "C" on a $6800 camera, made a few internal changes and now it's $15,000? Now I know why it's taken the longest time in Canon history from announcement to delivery of the "X" version and why it was dumbed down. This 4K fever for 98% of us on here won't mean squat for years to come and even longer with the general public. Almost 50% of tv's sold are 720P. You think you needed a computer upgrade for AVCHD, wait until you try 4K.

I wouldn't pay $2000 for a proper video camera without XLR imputs, to me $15,000 (or whatever it happens to sell for) is absurd for a rebadged DSLR. For the select few that like this new business model, more power to you. For the rest of us we will wait until the real video people at Canon design a camera, if they haven't already been fired.

Well Dave, that certainly raised my eyebrows.

Refer to my reply to you last month: Canon USA Announces EOS 5D Mark III -- March 10th, 2012, 04:27 PM (http://www.dvinfo.net/forum/digital-video-industry-news/505749-canon-usa-announces-eos-5d-mark-iii-9.html#post1720164)

... especially the first and last sentences there.

This 4K fever for 98% of us on here won't mean squat for years to come and even longer with the general public. Almost 50% of tv's sold are 720P. You think you needed a computer upgrade for AVCHD, wait until you try 4K.

I see a big opportunity for 4k acquisition in a DSLR form factor for documentary filmmaking and news/journalism. The ability to shoot an interview with a single camera, lens, support equipment and operator and then cut between wide and close-up simply through cropping represents a huge potential savings in production costs. So the fact that we'd all be delivering 1080p or lower can actually be an argument for the benefits of acquiring in a higher resolution.

The ability to shoot an interview with a single camera, lens, support equipment and operator and then cut between wide and close-up simply through cropping represents a huge potential savings in production costs.

This is exactly my thinking, too -- with 4K I can be quite "generous" while framing my shots, and then in post zoom & crop the footage. This also suits the way I like to work -- shoot as linear as possible, and then do most of the work in post. So yes, I definitely welcome a 4K camera, pronto.

-- peer

Canon put a red "C" on a $6800 camera, made a few internal changes and now it's $15,000?

I hope Canon people read that, though I imagine they'll enjoy reading it less than I did.

I'm still trying to figure out why they called it a 1D. The body doesn't look like any 1D I've ever seen. There's an EVF, no LCD video display, and BNC connectors. Good luck finding the firmware update that can deliver that. :)

Just because it has "1D" in the name doesn't mean that it's almost exactly like a 1D X.

Not too sure how a $15,000 camera with no lens or audio and a fixed screen translates into a "huge potential savings in production costs" especially when coupled with a computer to wrangle the 4K footage. Could somebody please explain to me how this would make a good form factor for documentaries and news gathering?

The only positive reason I see posted so far for 4K is framing!? “Ya, know boss, I have been having a little problem with framing. If you would spring for a couple 4K cameras and update the editing suites, you wouldn’t be all over my butt about that framing thing”. This is saving me HUGE in production costs?

This is still a DSLR camera that happens to shoot video and here’s a question. Do you think maybe the form factor is contributing to your framing problems?

How many photographers would spring for this? Zero would be my guess. This was aimed directly at the video crowd and I’m amazed at how many people bit. It could be very likely the first and most expensive Canon DSLR camera in history that never takes one photo.

For the love of god man could somebody at Canon at least TALK to those folks in the video camera division? If I’m going down, I’m going down swinging.

I will say one thing... I bet the footage from this thing is gorgeous.

BUT... for 15k, you could be getting a LOT more for your money. I know if I was to spend that much, I would be looking at just about anything else as a much more complete video camera solution that functions more than a simple sensor box. Which is just about how this camera feels like to me.

Honestly, I mean this with all due humility - if you know how to shoot and light, 5DII footage looks gorgeous.

We've got and will keep shooting with two of them. I'm cutting my most recent project, all shot in 5DIIs and the quality continues to impress me. We have moire issues that mean anything on a rare occasion, and record audio separately as we alway have.

The only thing I would upgrade for right now, would be 1080p 60fps. Other than that, for 99% of the work being produced now and for the next few years, either 5D will continue to serve as a world class tool.

Even at $12k the 1D C is absurdly priced for what it offers as a film making tool.

Canon video gear has always been overpriced. However, Canon DSLR gear (1100D to 5D) are at excellent price points for the features they offer. I believe marrying the video and stills departments was an excellent decision, considering the future. I'm not sure it has worked out very well for Canon so far, but of one thing I'm quite certain - Canon rarely disappoints on image quality, delivery and customer service.

Even though I think the 1DC to be an outrageously priced camera, Canon has really thought this through. Those who cannot afford a 4K pipeline shouldn't even be looking at this camera. In fact, if I have to shoot a 4K movie and all I could afford was a $15K camera, I'd still pick this weather-sealed DSLR and its 8-bit codec over a Red Scarlet. To me peace of mind is worth the extra 30% in price.

The only other company that comes close is Sony. What I'm eagerly waiting for is Panasonic's and JVC's reply to these announcements.

I have the Canon EOS-1D X on pre-order and one of our favorite Pro videogear websites. Then Canon comes out and announce and almost identical camera except it can shoot native 4K!

I believe that's the only real difference! At least it appears to be the only difference in the side by side comparison which you can see at the link below:

Side by Side Comparison: Digital Photography Review (http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=canon_eos1dx&products=canon_eos1dc)

I guess it comes down to do you whether you want to pay $6700 street and stay at 1080p for your video movies or you want to pay $13500 street (my guestimate) and be able to shoot 4K videos native?

Yes I already have a digital 4K projector in my home theater. (Sony SRX-S105)

Yes, Douglas, that's certainly a whole pile of money extra to have that higher resolution 4096 x 2160 (24 fps) inside the exact same body; although I expect those who MUST have 4K will part with their well-earned cash to have one.

I truly cannot understand why the EOS 1D-C is ONLY 24fps (which is mainly US & Japanese broadcast), because Europe mainly shoots in 25p for broadcast and do not mix it with 24p. Surely for that price they will bring out a 1D-C body able to use 25p at full rez? Without it, I doubt if many, including the BBC, will even entertain it.

Just because it has "1D" in the name doesn't mean that it's almost exactly like a 1D X.

Side by Side Comparison: Digital Photography Review (http://www.dpreview.com/products/compare/side-by-side?products=canon_eos1dx&products=canon_eos1dc)

I'm confused here -- are Jon and Douglas talking about different cameras..? Other than the 4K capability, I don't see much of a difference between the 1DX and the 1DC.

-- peer

Honestly, I mean this with all due humility - if you know how to shoot and light, 5DII footage looks gorgeous.


Isn't that true of pretty much any real camera? :)

Also, I don't think they're "neglecting" the lower markets.
These are NAB announcements after all. The high-end pro
gear is indicated for now. Prosumer, etc. to follow later.

Is this insider information? I see no reason to think this will be the case. Plus, the moniker "prosumer" is passe. The notion that you can't be a professional shooting on an $8000 camera is absurd. And comparison to what Betacam cameras used to cost is a bit silly. The problem Canon has now is how can they deliver an $8000 video camera while at the same time justifying the $15,000 they want to charge for the EOS-1D C or the $16,000 for the C300. I just don't see the wiggle room. Lack of 4K on the 1D C and dummying down the sensor on the C300? These are the only significant options. Can that alone justify a 50% price break?

There also tends to be an assumption on this board that Canon will eventually deliver and their decisions will make sense. I don't subscribe to that assumption. In the past, Canon has been extremely late to the market. They were 2 years behind Sony with HDV. The XF cameras are great, but they were also over 2 years behind the EX-1 and EX-3.

In my opinion, Sony has positioned themselves to take advantage of every level of the market. We'll see, but all I know is I'm looking this fall at purchasing a camera. I'm not expecting Canon to have any other offerings. I'd love to be proven wrong.

With the 1D C listing for $15k, what are the odds we start to see cameras like the F3 enter the sub $10k market? There seems to be a real push for 4k by the manufacturers. One would hope this drives down the price of full frame 1080P cameras.

It's always pretty much the same - early adopters pay top price for new tech.

By the time 4k becomes of any real value/relevance outside of cinemas, it will be priced a lot differently.
As much as you read of the wish lists for clean HDMI out for a separate recorder, 4k etc., practically speaking, almost all of us producing TV, docs and promo work want to record our work in camera, at 1080p with a simple codec that our NLEs will ingest and edit simply.

Everything else is a niche right now and you pay for niche products.

Honestly, outside of a 4k screening environment, I can't see a DP that couldn't do as well with the 5DIII for $3500 (or 5DII for $2k) and L glass as they would with the $15k 1D C and PL glass.

Is this insider information?No. It's just a well-educated guess on my part. However I have worked their side of the counter many times in the past, and I think I've got more than half a clue as to what their overall game plan is. It's still just speculation but I'm usually more right than wrong about these things.

The notion that you can't be a professional shooting on an $8000 camera is absurd.Agree 100% and I never meant to imply otherwise.

And comparison to what Betacam cameras used to cost is a bit silly.Sorry, I disagree. Although I'm pretty sure that I've been referencing the Varicam (elsewhere on the forum perhaps), which is much more relevant to this discussion.

The problem Canon has now is how can they deliver an $8000 video camera while at the same time justifying the $15,000 they want to charge for the EOS-1D C or the $16,000 for the C300...But they're doing that right now with the XF 305, a completely different kind of tool for a different kind of job.

In the past, Canon has been extremely late to the market. They were 2 years behind Sony with HDV.For that matter they were two years behind Sony with DV. It has always been that way with Canon and probably always will be. It's part of their conservative corporate culture and I don't expect that to ever change.

Not too sure how a $15,000 camera with no lens or audio and a fixed screen translates into a "huge potential savings in production costs" especially when coupled with a computer to wrangle the 4K footage. Could somebody please explain to me how this would make a good form factor for documentaries and news gathering?

The only positive reason I see posted so far for 4K is framing!? “Ya, know boss, I have been having a little problem with framing. If you would spring for a couple 4K cameras and update the editing suites, you wouldn’t be all over my butt about that framing thing”. This is saving me HUGE in production costs?

You're right - $15k is too high for this camera. I was just addressing your question of why anyone would even need 4k in the near future. However, I'm also operating under the assumption that the actual price will end up noticeably lower based on what happened with the C300.

But I still think there's a valid argument to be made here - assuming someone who is traveling regularly to shoot (i.e. doc/news shooters) and for whom having to carry half as much gear is a significant savings. If you're shooting with a pair of 5DmkIII with the kit lens you're already talking about $10k worth of equipment, plus the hassle of having to transport it and the support equipement. If you're shooting more than just sit-down interviews you'll also need a second shooter. It doesn't take a lot of days of paying a second shooter to quickly exceed the price difference even at the current $15k estimated price - and that's just paying a day rate, not even taking into account their additional travel costs.

This is still a DSLR camera that happens to shoot video and here’s a question. Do you think maybe the form factor is contributing to your framing problems?

Uh, no. I actually prefer the DSLR form factor in many situations, especially for some types of two camera setups - but there's been several times I can think of where having a single camera would have been much better. A specific situation I can think of is with the subject speaking directly into the camera - it's nearly impossible to do this with two cameras and have the eyeline look natural. No problem though with a single camera with enough resolution to crop wide and cu from the same shot.

"Prosumer" implies the pros and consumers buy it. I can assure you no consumers are purchasing an $8000 camera. Heck, when I tell people my GH2 cost $1000, they are shocked at how expensive it is. All the cameras we are talking about are professional cameras.

I wasn't specifically saying you said anything about Betacam. However there are posts that come up quite frequently to justify how much Canon's cameras cost, saying "remember how expensive it used to be XX years ago to get a Broadcast camera. $16,000 is cheap." I think that sentiment is irrelevant.

The second thing that happens is those like me who are not finding anything within my price range in the Canon line are immediately labeled as naive, expecting the moon for $1500. Nothing is further from the truth. I don't think it is unreasonable to want Canon to make a large sensor video camera for less than $10,000. Sony and Panasonic are able to do it.

The XF305 is a competitor to the EX1/EX3. There is no reason to sell my EX1 and buy it. 1/3" chips are not the look I'm interested in.

Strangely Canon was ahead of the game with large sensor cameras when they released the 5D. So now they are going from being two years ahead to being behind? What happened? But the real question is "Does Canon want my business?" Surprisingly, the answer seems to be "No."

They don't have the same economies of scale that Panasonic and Sony have. Compared to those mammoths, Canon is a tiny company.


Apparently they want to stay that way.

I'm confused here -- are Jon and Douglas talking about different cameras..? Other than the 4K capability, I don't see much of a difference between the 1DX and the 1DC.

Sorry. My mistake.

The first photos I had seen associated with the 1D C articles showed the left side of the 1D C shown next to the right side of the 500C. Brain warp!

Evan,

We now have officially entered the “Twilight Zone”. Your post makes no sense and your second shooter scenario about costs is ludicrous. I do hire people and travel regularly to shoot and if weight/size is an issue I can get two cameras and everything I need in a Lowepro Slingshot. (Not counting support) IT WOULD NEVER BE TWO DSLR’s.

But going with your example of two brand-spanking new 5D mk III’s and kit lenses at $8600 plus tax just reinforces how stupid this $15,000 DSLR is. I could add an XF300 to my 2 5D III packages and still be less. Now I have three fantastic cameras up and running and you still have no lens OR audio. And you are talking about saving money in a daily rate? That’s absurd.

Anyone who chooses this $15,000 DSLR better be shooting and delivering in 4K TODAY or has more money than sense. If you’re actually running a business and don’t need to deliver in 4K this will be nothing but a huge waste of money. You want 4K for framing?!

I can pull off your subject speaking into the camera “crop” in camera with my $2995 XF100 while filming. Re-program the front push-button dial and you can go back and forth between wide and 1.5X till the cows come home or your audience gets sick of it. And if you’re really poor at framing you can crop that 10% more without noticeable loss. And for the love of god would you try and limit that move to two times maximum per interview, it’s already getting old.

IMHO anybody who would prefer the DSLR form factor in ANY situation (other than for the LOOK) doesn’t own a real video camera. And if you come up with one situation where a DSLR is better I can come up with ten where it’s lacking. We all have been tortured enough with shaky, fast and out of focus footage long enough.

See, I thought we already got past this about 20 years ago with Canon and XLR inputs on a proper video camera. There are some of us who remember when it was an OPTION. Canon was pretty much trained to put them on any real video camera they made and now at $15,000, they are starting to fall off again. This is insane.

For a moment there I was beginning to sweat it. Having decided a fortnight ago to jump from the mark II to 5D3 to practically eliminate moire and aliasing, I thought I'd jumped too soon before the 1D C announcement.

Fortunately I can breathe again knowing not only is the 15K price tag out of my price range, it seems the camera won't be capable of producing 25fps footage for the European Market either. A non-starter.

The 5D3 is still not perfect for me, I really need 1080p/60fps minimum and I was shocked not to see it on the mark III. Canon are testing my loyalty right now!

From reading this entire thread, it appears a lot of people are getting rather impatient with Canon. Can't say I blame them.

I was one of those little folk swept up off my feet into their wonderful 5D mark II revolution. Although that was a game changer for me, it's a shame their little accident that recruited an army lacks the leadership to take the movement forward.

[EDIT:] A friend saw this post and sent an SMS, 'Did you not see the FS700 announcement?' ... Actually, I hadn't as I've been working flat out on a shoot all week and had only been keeping my eyes open for the NAB announcement on Canon's 4K DSLR. Now that I have, I think you know what I'm going to be saving up for until end of June. My only regret is buying the 5D3 too quickly afterall...

i've been waiting for a replacement for mk2 for months.... end up i got a used FS100 for couple hundreds more... i am happy with it. Can't wait til the C100 announcement... and i think canon won't sell it cheap

Don't get me wrong, I fell in love with my 5d mkII the first time I held it. It changed how I shoot and lit a fire in me that still has not gone out.

I also think this announcement is what the Nov 3 2011 announcement should have been. The specs on both the cameras look interesting, but here is my problem. They are just off the mark(price) ever since the C300. I mean why would I spend that $15 grand on the 1D-C for 4K 24fps when I could drop that into a Scarlet and get 4k at 24 - 30fps, not to mention shooting in RAW and on top of that I get HDRx.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to preach Red here, and the Scarlet has it's own hurtles to jump, media is expensive as hell, and the batteries are not the best. I chose a Scarlet over the C300, but Canon you really have forgotten about the market and the people that really kicked off the DSLR movement for you. Stop dreaming about Hollywood and come back to us.

Just one question:
why does everyone seem to interpret "Full HD 1920 x 1080 video at selectable frame
rates from 24p to 60p" as "you can only chose between 24 or 60fps?

I interpreted it as "you can chose framerates that lie between 24fps and 60fps".
Did I miss something?
Or is Canon silly enough to make the framerate mistake again? :-p

here is a link to canons take on digital cinema options (C300 C500 EOS 1D C)

Canon Cinema EOS | Products: Cameras (http://cinemaeos.usa.canon.com/products.php?type=Cameras)

We now have officially entered the “Twilight Zone” (...)I can pull off your subject speaking into the camera “crop” in camera with my $2995 XF100 while filming. Re-program the front push-button dial and you can go back and forth between wide and 1.5X till the cows come home or your audience gets sick of it.

Actually this response seems more 'Twilight Zone' to me. First off, punching in to the center of the shot isn't likely to work very well unless your subject is perfectly centered, which isn't usually the case for me, and wouldn't work at all in situations like cutting from a wide two shot to a cu of one person. Whereas in post you can completely reframe each shot with a 4k source based on what was appropriate for the particular shot.

But that aside, you're saying that as you shoot an interview you can consistently predict when you'll need to cut to a different angle? Frankly, that's amazing to me, and we clearly work differently. When I shoot an interview I usually cut most of it out in post. When I need to cut in the middle of a shot, and I either don't have or it's inappropriate to cut away to b-roll to cover it I'll often cut to the other angle rather than have a jump cut. I may be wrong in assuming anyone else works that way, but personally I can't imagine how I would predict exactly when those cuts would happen ahead of time, on the fly, during the shoot, every time.

IMHO anybody who would prefer the DSLR form factor in ANY situation (other than for the LOOK) doesn’t own a real video camera. And if you come up with one situation where a DSLR is better I can come up with ten where it’s lacking.

Honestly, this is the real reason for my original post. There seems to be a common attitude recently when discussing many of these new cameras that if it doesn't fit into one's particular workflow or needs then the manufacturer is crazy for releasing that particular camera at all. I'd venture there are more ways of working in the video world now than there ever were, and we've got an incredibly diverse range of cameras to meet any one of those. Almost your entire post is dedicated to explaining why anyone who thinks differently than you is wrong. I get it - the DSLR form factor doesn't work for you. There are plenty of other cameras to chose from, and you've clearly found ones that do work for you - but that has nothing to do with what anyone else might choose, it doesn't mean that their choice is any less valid than your own, and it certainly doesn't mean there's no use for a 4k DSLR if you're not delivering in 4k today.

I truly cannot understand why the EOS 1D-C is ONLY 24fps (which is mainly US & Japanese broadcast), because Europe mainly shoots in 25p for broadcast and do not mix it with 24p. Surely for that price they will bring out a 1D-C body able to use 25p at full rez? Without it, I doubt if many, including the BBC, will even entertain it.

I agree. I originally ASSUMED this was just an oversight in the marketing blurb but I've just seen an Engadget video taken at NAB of the camera where near the end they show the LCD with "all" the frame options displayed. Clear as day, 25p is not on the list. Canon must be bonkers! I'm sure the DvInfo crew attending NAB will quiz them on this!

I know on a 550D you need to switch the camera to Pal in order to use 25P this is done in a separate menu to the rest of the frame rate options. Perhaps there is Pal/NTSC buried deep in the menus?

Good thought Sam. Hope you're right!

The EOS-1D C does not allow you to change it via the internal Menu. The specs detail that it has Pal 25P in all the lower resolutions except the highest 4K which is ONLY 24fps.

It details all the Pal options, yet nothing for the highest video resolution. Very strange for Canon to do this...unless the spec-sheets are incorrect.

Canon official details NO 25P:

http://cpn.canon-europe.com/content/education/technical/eos_1d_c_explained.do

Almost 80% of the world use 25P (and Secam), including Bollywood in India (which is bigger than Hollywood in films produced), Australia, South Africa, Europe etc...

Latest news update from those lucky enough to handle the EOS-1D C is that you definitely need to drop to 2K to use 25P.