The End of the Video DSLR?

end-video-dslrThe pressure is on for HDR and better video from all cameras. Will manufacturers continue to improve video DSLR and mirrorless cameras?

With Panasonic rumored to be bringing 4K 10-bit 4:2:2 video to the GH5, and Canon’s latest snub to the video DSLR crowd with the less than appreciated video specs of the Canon 5D Mark IV, I see a definite argument to be made that the cross-breed love affair of the photo and video world could come to an end.

This is just an opinion, speculation only, but based on a very real question that manufacturers are going to have to answer for themselves. We published an article a year ago that might be worth revisiting: Are Video DSLRs dying out?

When Photo Met Video

What started as an afterthought for Canon turned the Canon 5D Mark II into an overnight video sensation, and all the major manufacturers followed suit bringing professional video capabilities to their cameras in the form of video DSLR and mirrorless line-ups. The pinnacle of this trend now is arguably the much loved Sony a7S II.

Log gamma profiles and other “pro” features are considered basic requirements for video modes on what are still essentially photo cameras… something we tend to forget.

I think we may all soon be reminded that these are in fact photo cameras.

With the inevitable push towards HDR deliverables, and camera sensors capable of ever higher dynamic range it is clear that 8-bit 4:2:0 H.264 video, common to these cameras, even with a log gamma curve is no longer going to cut it.

Blurred Lines

Manufacturers are now faced with a choice. They either have to increase the color bit depth and video quality, as Panasonic is rumored to be doing, offering more, and better image data from the video modes of cameras that officially still sit in a photography product line, or leave video alone and focus on making those cameras the best they can be for professional photography.

I would argue that we’ve just seen Canon’s answer to this question. Time will tell how the others will handle it. The result of substantially increasing video quality from stills cameras is a potential conflict of interest with professional video or cinema range cameras in their own product offering.

For Panasonic this may not be a huge factor, but neither Canon or Sony can afford to offer a relatively low cost photo camera with video capabilities approaching the FS7, or anything in Canon’s Cinema EOS range.

In this context I am not at all surprised about the decisions Canon have made, that will redefine what the new Canon 5D Mark IV is, and where it is targeted… it is, after all, a professional photo camera, and a very good one at that.

Panasonic and Fujifilm

There are manufacturers with less to lose. Panasonic I have mentioned already, I believe a hypothetical GH5 with 4K 10-bit 4:2:2 internal recording could be a real upset, there would be a lot of interest in such a camera from some existing Canon and Sony users despite the smaller sensor. Another player that has nothing at all to lose is Fujifilm, and the new Fujifilm X-T2 looks to be heading in a good direction.

Will we begin to see a separation of video from photo from future DSLR and mirrorless platforms?
Time will tell, but it is an interesting discussion to have, feel free to share your thoughts in the comments. In the end, we will have to wait and see how it plays out.

Leave a Comment

Login to comment

You are not subscribed to this post. Follow new comments

Chris Reynolds Reply
Chris Reynolds August 30, 2016

Of course not! Manufactures with half a brain-cell will carry on……which pretty much rules Canon out!!!

Fred Lescano Reply
Fred Lescano August 30, 2016

Good article. Except the part when it makes the 5D mk2 seem like the first DSLR with video when in fact it was the Nikon D90.

Nino Leitner Reply
Nino Leitner August 30, 2016

It was the first with 1080p 30 and later 24/25fps

Fred Lescano Reply
Fred Lescano August 30, 2016

Right it was 720p at 24 frames. The mk2 was also the first used on a major project for TV. So it definitely got more shine for that. The rest as they say is history.

Nino Leitner Reply
Nino Leitner August 30, 2016

Fred Lescano as far as I remember the was little manual control over the D90 as well

Fred Lescano Reply
Fred Lescano August 30, 2016

I’m sure it was so primitive compared to how it is now. But I definitely see how there is beginning to be a separation in the photo/video products. Integration is nice but if you need specific features, you need to get what has what you need. I personally shoot with the ursa mini 4.6K for film and Nikon dslr for photos.

 Beebee Lestr Reply
Beebee Lestr August 31, 2016

The Canon 5D Mark ii was the first usable DSLR video, and the first with 1080p and full-frame size for video.

Pity that with the Mark iv the wheels fell off the cart.

Christian Santiago Reply
Christian Santiago August 30, 2016

Disagree. Sony is putting pro level feautures in their 900 dollar a6300 and still sell plenty of Fs7. Video and photography is no longer the segmented industries they once were. Lots of shooters are now hybrid guys who do both and who eould rather not pay for two separate systems.

Kirill Kripak Reply
Kirill Kripak August 30, 2016

There’s also plenty of varying uses for the 2. There’s so many instances where shooting on something like a c100/fs7 limits you whereas a dslr opens up tremendously.

Leonardo Moreti Reply
Leonardo Moreti August 30, 2016

mi-mi-mi :P

Movie Review Reply
Movie Review August 30, 2016

absolutely right could not agree more

Franz Schuier Reply
Franz Schuier August 30, 2016

“With the inevitable push towards HDR deliverables, and camera sensors capable of ever higher dynamic range it is clear that 8-bit 4:2:0 H.264 video, common to these cameras, even with a log gamma curve is no longer going to cut it.”
For Narrative TV/Streaming this may be true.
What about the growing market for low budget video production for the web? I dont see my customers paying extra for HDR or 10Bit, in fact it suprises me again and again how little they care about image quality. Most of them would be happy with 7D quality, if the content/storytelling works.
In the end they sometimes upload preview files to their social media channels.

Richard Lackey Reply
Richard Lackey August 30, 2016

Very good point… and that establishes the fact that a growing market remains and isn’t about to disappear either.

Damian Popławski Reply
Damian Popławski August 30, 2016

Couldn’t agree more :-/ I mean we invest in th equipment trying to be up to date, we try to make the image quality as good as possible, we color grade it and many times in the end client doesn’t even appreciates all this effort. Other hand how they love the quality and the cinematic feeling of the videos, however they don’t even realize how much effort and money it requires to get really decesnt results ;-)

Steve MacDonald Reply
Steve MacDonald August 31, 2016

Do you really think HDR is an inevitable push? If it follows the 4K push, which still has for the most part, no real demand, and certainly no forseeable broadcast future here in the United States, I personally think HDR is at least a decade away from having any traction, if at all. I guess time will tell!

Martin Vesselinov Reply
Martin Vesselinov August 31, 2016

Depends what clients you aim at. Small companies aiming at the general consumer don’t insist on good image quality. However, I can see more and more development in high-quality web video, great lighting, and use of more advanced camera equipment – starting from fs7 which I shoot with every now and then and going through even Phantoms, Arris, etc. I don’t think this was the case a few years ago but now with the availability of fast internet access anywhere on the go and more advanced mobile technology – phones, tablets, etc – I can predict only an increase in overall web video quality.

Franz Schuier Reply
Franz Schuier August 31, 2016

Martin Vesselinov Yes, there are these customers, BUT the faster growing market are small companies starting to get Video produced, And they just dont have the budgets for lightning, the crew involved, big camera setups. Depends on the project and client YES, but small projects will still need cheap and multifuntional tools.

Martin Vesselinov Reply
Martin Vesselinov August 31, 2016

I agree, and this is why I also don’t completely agree with the article – there will always be the prosumer range of tools because that’s a huge market – from hobbyists to professionals. It’s just that some companies will aim at that market and some won’t.

Pete Manabat Reply
Pete Manabat August 30, 2016

What are external recorders for? :D

Philipp Abele Reply
Philipp Abele August 30, 2016

If the HDMI out is only 8Bit 4:2:0 / 4:2:2? I guess focus control :-P

Pete Manabat Reply
Pete Manabat August 30, 2016

Haha correct. But somehow 8 bit pro res 422’s gonna get you to broadcast quality on a budget. It’s not ideal but it works.

Pete Manabat Reply
Pete Manabat August 30, 2016

Is it the end of canon as video dslr though? Haha

Movie Review Reply
Movie Review August 30, 2016

I agree Awesome comment

Melvin Chong Reply
Melvin Chong August 30, 2016

The broadcast industry is more excited in pushing for more unnecessarily high resolution than pushing for more better quality content.

Marko Hila Reply
Marko Hila August 30, 2016

It’s not like Canon’s C range is anything exciting either. Their only semi decent offering is a staggering $20K C300 mk2 and even that is quite light on some essentials like DR, raw capabilities and bitrate.
The C100 will continue to be the mediocre run and gun because most other manufactures haven’t got off their arse properly to create a similar ergonomically convenient apparatus. There are many cameras out there that do a great job offering incredible DR, resolution, prores 422, RAW etc. Canon misjudged the industry’s needs and it will bite them.
They’re greedy and clueless. 5D mklV is all the proof you need.

Movie Review Reply
Movie Review August 30, 2016

yup<3

Kirill Kripak Reply
Kirill Kripak August 31, 2016

Sony has, with the fs5. It’s a near perfect run ‘n gun.

Marko Hila Reply
Marko Hila August 31, 2016

It’s heading in the right direction but it’s still a bit off the mark IMO.

Jarad Clement Reply
Jarad Clement August 31, 2016

I was a C100 hater until I used one, then I fell in love. Far from a mediocre tool, its a great camera. For the type of work I do, I dont need 422 or RAW, but I need mic pres, long battery life and reliability. The C100 gives me that with a superb image quality. I will be upgrading to the C100 MKIII if it has 4k, the one thing I lust for.

Marko Hila Reply
Marko Hila August 31, 2016

I use the C100 day in – day out too. Trust me it ticks many boxes. Great onboard audio with perfect controls, NDs, handle with controls right where they belong, great for low light, sharp 1080p as it’s a 4K sensor, but it has a limited DR for what we do (real estate productions) and a very weak codec. It’s a workhorse with acceptable quality for corporate/web. Anything beyond that requires real tools. Even the pocket from Blackmagic makes it look dull, which btw I absolutely love. They used the pocket heavily on the new Bourne movie as a C cam/crash cam and hearing how the director spoke about it being the only small camera with acceptable DR and colour science that matches the Alexa you have to start wondering about what Canon offers us.
The C100 mk2 should’ve had at least 4K with such a low bitrate codec and 100fps in HD which would need the same amount of bandwidth as 4K at 25fps.
That would’ve been respectable but I doubt they’ll add this even to a future mark3… knowing Canon.

Kirill Kripak Reply
Kirill Kripak August 31, 2016

You’re assuming I haven’t worked with the c series. I have, both the c100 and the c300. Really hated the c300 (terribly balanced) and the c100 was fine and considered it, but I have so much quality glass that just doesn’t fit the EF-mount (voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 is currently my favourite Lens).

Literally the ONLY thing I can think of that the c100 has over the fs5 is that canon color science, but these days that’s not enough.

Jurij Segal Reply
Jurij Segal August 30, 2016

Yes, it is!

Movie Review Reply
Movie Review August 30, 2016

Free movie Stream Here: bit.ly/2bfAR2J Enjoy!!!

Seyit Battal Kurt Reply
Seyit Battal Kurt August 30, 2016

What a beautiful nonsense you can bring up just to bring up somethings and argue about nothing.

Reply
Wolfgang Ernst September 1, 2016

Thanks, Seyit Battal. Your lyrical expression says it perfectly. Yes, it’s always palavering for the sake of palaver. Stop talking about tools, stop talking nonsense. Any filming tool is valuable as long as it enhances your ambition to create artwork – regardless for which purpose the tool originally was built.

Dan Buck Joyce Reply
Dan Buck Joyce August 30, 2016

After using mirrorless since my first A7, weight has become my deciding factor, I used an FS7 on the weekend and hated it, light weight wins every time for me.

Patrick Grossien Reply
Patrick Grossien August 30, 2016

Hehehe. Love the picture

Rooi Sebastiao Reply
Rooi Sebastiao August 30, 2016

what is “broadcast quality“ for you guys? all public channels in my country are PAL widescreen. few with decoders play 720p, only some (supersport) sports (paid) channels play 1080p.

Doug Marke Reply
Doug Marke September 2, 2016

Broadcast quality is a technical spec that is irrelevant in the web/digital environment, and for most businesses trying to hit that spec lifts costs out of all proportion to the value of project.

Rooi Sebastiao Reply
Rooi Sebastiao September 2, 2016

what are those technical specs exactly?

Marcin Dobrowolski Reply
Marcin Dobrowolski August 30, 2016

Sam Interesting article

 Beebee Lestr Reply
Beebee Lestr August 30, 2016

There is a huge number of video professionals who want to shoot ‘full-frame’ video.

Full-frame video has an appealing look. The shallow depth-of-field. The sparkling bokeh. Being able to film wide angles. Artistic decisions.

I want full-frame video, but I don’t care what form factor it comes in. If it looks like a video camera that’s fine.

There are not many 4K full-frame video options. As you say, Sony’s A7Sii DSLR camera does full-frame 4K. I’m surprised Canon, of all manufacturers, is avoiding full-frame 4K.

In the cinema world, the Arri Alexa 65mm camera is catching on. It has a vertical frame height very similar to 35mm still photo full-frame. It was used in The Revenant to capture the beautiful wide views.

Reply
Ahmed Abul Burghul August 30, 2016

Good one rich Richard Lackey

 Gregory David Reply
Gregory David August 31, 2016

Are video DSLR’s dying out? I won’t hold my breath! When you say that DSLR video capabilities will no longer cut it, I wonder who for. The feature, TV commercial and high end documentary producers are already using dedicated video cameras.

Speaking as a DSLR user, my business is mostly corporate and my primary cameras are 2 GH4s. I shoot 4k all the time and will only shoot 1080 for slo-mo or when I need a super wide shot. I am constantly amazed at what I am able to achieve using them. Lighting, camera movement and direction are key. Familiarity with the camera and what you can do with it is imperative. The point is there is so much that goes into making good film/video that is not dependent on the performance of the camera and there are a mass of shooters who’s ROI will not improve with more complex and expensive cameras. I shoot stills a fair amount on production with the video DSLR, very useful. Why lug around another set of gear on an airplane when you don’t have to?

That brings me to postproduction. While editing 4k on my Macbook Pro is a pain, I can do do it. I hope the next Macbook will improve matters, but I don’t need all the dedicated hardware and hard drive performance required by large files that will not improve my ROI.

If some manufactures abandon the video equipped DSLR and only offer video cameras, so be it, but they better do it for less than $2000 or they will loose a lot of sales. Long live DSLR video!

Reply
Dallas Bland August 31, 2016

I think the key point here is that people are forgetting these are stills cameras – with bonus video. Manufacturers could chuck in all the ‘pro’ features they want but in turn they jack the price up for pro photographers, a lot of which don’t give a rats out ‘pro’ video features. And that’s canons bread n butter for stills cameras. Hybrid shooters didn’t exist before the 5d2. They came about ‘because’ of the gear not the other way around. And now hybrid shooters are demanding the cameras live up to their expectations like its canons job to pander to a market outside of their key demographic. Everyone wants ALL the best stills features, ALL the best video features, and they want it for a price that non-pros can handle without missing a mortgage payment. Now don’t get me wrong, I would love to see these features in these cameras. Like everyone I want maximum bang for buck. But when it doesn’t happen I don’t see the point in saying ‘OMG CANON HATES US!’ Canon doesn’t hate you!

Reply
Caine Mitchell August 31, 2016

Regardless I think at the mid to low end we’ll still all be pining for that “Zen” camera 😀

Jason Harris Reply
Jason Harris August 31, 2016

I just wanna go on record here, and say that I think it IS the end. The 5d mkiv proves that. As philip bloom, and many others, put it; DSLR will always be a stills camera first. For instance, Canon seems to to be trying much too hard to keep a balance between photo and video capabilities on all of their DSLRs. Yet they make niche cameras like the 5Dsr that have much better still capabilites and are directed at photographers. This is unfair to Video users considering what technology is available to Canon. There simply are no video specific DSLRs. Canon must be attempting to rely on brand loyalty to coast on or something. It appears that if you want a DSLR-size video camera, just turn to the A7SII or the rumored GH5.

William Malone Reply
William Malone August 31, 2016

I’m a feature film director who enjoys making low budget films on the side. I fell in love with both the build quality and imaging of Canon products. Having been an owner of many film cameras including Arri SRs and even eclair NPRs. I for one, am not saddened or surprised by Canon’s decision to ignore the video DSLR. If you’ve ever shot with a film camera, they just are a better form factor for shooting movies. I spoke with Canon at CineGear Expo a few years ago about DSLRs (I later found out the guy I was talking to, was the designer of the Canon 5D series. When I told him what people wanted (basically everything that Magic Lantern offers for free) he (very nicely) said to buy the Canon C300 MkII. I told him that it was too expensive.

The problem is, Canon doesn’t understand that even if you can afford a $10k-$15K camera, it doesn’t make economical sense. Camera specs change too fast and buying one (unless your a rental house) is a bad idea. By the time the camera hits the streets, its already obsolete. The Canon C300 needs to compete with Black Magic and Sony.

Mike Ditka Reply
Mike Ditka September 1, 2016

No one cares about your record. Trust me.

 Beebee Lestr Reply
Beebee Lestr August 31, 2016

It’s hard to work out why Canon got video so wrong on the latest 5D.

At first I thought it might be that the 5D Mark IV’s image sensor has too many pixels to downsample (to extract the 4K video image).

But the Mark iii had a 22 megapixel sensor. The Mark iv is 30 megapixel, less than a third increase in 4 years. Yet both the Mark iii and Mark iv already downsample to get the 1080p output. It can’t be that hard to do the same for 4K, as it still has to sample the whole sensor to get 1080p. Sony has no trouble with this.

Lack of a log file format or waveform monitor in LiveView is unforgivable. Canon could easily add those in firmware, but they don’t want to.

It really looks like Canon is spitting on its video users. It does not want us.

I wonder if Canon actually knows what proportion of 5D users have the camera primarily for video. I think Canon underestimates this. Canon doesn’t understand its own market.

Canon’s C100, C300 and C500 cameras don’t fill the niche either. I want the ‘full-frame’ look for a reason, just like stills photographers want the full-frame look, and don’t want to use cropped sensors.

Reply
Adam P September 3, 2016

The 5D III 1080p is 3×3 binned from the sensor, not downsampled.

And the 5D IV does not downsample from all the pixels, just a bit more than 1080p.

The 5D IV rolling shutter seems bad enough with the cropped 4k already so even if it was capable of a full 30MP sensor readout, it would be downright unusable.
The 1DX II is considerably better (about the same as GH4), possibly because of the lower megapixel count and more processing power.

They will probably do a more video-oriented DSLR at some point (C-Log, lower MP, better processor) with a 5DC model that has been rumored for some time. But it will cost a good deal more, like $7k, that’s their strategy.

They understand the market and they can also adapt to it, but only if it is needed.

Zach Goodwin Reply
Zach Goodwin August 31, 2016

I’ll go ahead and buy you guys’ FD lenses and T2is, and your iscoramas.

Richard Lackey Reply
Richard Lackey August 31, 2016

Such awesome comments! When I wrote the article I was really hoping that a. I wouldn’t totally get burned by everyone (I’m just putting forward an idea) and b. that we’d get a ton of conversation looking at both sides of the argument. I hope some reps from manufacturers read these kinds of discussion and pay attention to what real users want. Thanks guys for all of the good points you’ve brought up.

Reply
Mike Tesh August 31, 2016

Let’s not call out the death of the DSLR-like video revolution simply because one camera (the 5DmkIV) doesn’t live up to expectations. If anything it is taking off more now that you see FujiFilm and Olympus entering the 4k market. Rumors of the new GH5 featuring higher specs and it doesn’t seem like Sony is slowing down either. So let’s not get crazy here and dig a grave just yet.

Keep in mind that Canon did deliver DCI 4K and higher frame rate 1080p shooting in the new 5D. Just not in the way most people wanted. This to me seems more like a technical limitation on their part. They are doing a 1:1 pixel readout for the best quality they can get, but it seems they just don’t have the technological prowess that Sony does in the processing department. But even Sony struggles with heat issues. We’ve also seen Nikon struggle with those same heat issues in weather sealed bodies when offering 4K, even when using a crop of the sensor the way Canon is. So it looks like Canon is trying to play it safe and deliver a less processor intensive codec and read less of the sensor in order to not overheat the camera. Which means that when technology advances enough we could very well see a full frame 4K 5D from Canon in the future. I could be wrong about this, but even if I am lets not judge an entire market segment based on just one camera or company. Even though they were the first to really offer it, doesn’t mean they’ll be the one to end it.

Reply
Dan Hyman August 31, 2016

Sony, Canon or Panasonic could put a Full Frame sensor, 4K, Slow Mo, ProRes, 10-bit or higher, XLR combo into a camera and make it the size of something between an 5D Mark IV and an F5. They can.

They’ve created an interesting scenario. We get so caught up in frame rates, codecs, sensors, etc that if you step back and look, all the cameras out there now can do what we need them to, in one model or another.

It’s a money game and they need to optimize profits. They could release the Sony X tomorrow with every bell and whistle, every spec, in a perfect ergonomic package. But the money is in the next one. And the next one. If they make the next model with everything we want, their entire lineups are shot.

A company like Blackmagic (if they get their quality control together), RED (if they figure out the price barrier) or some other video-only company is going to win big here, and force Sony/Canon/Pana to come out with something we all know they can release.

I think most likely it’s moving towards releasing separate components. Body/handle, sensor, lens mount, audio, and processor for recording different codecs, and snapping together your frankenstein camera with universal connections. Same brand, just levels of components.

Hey Big 3, start with the perfect body, hold a contest with 100s of submissions for the perfect shell of a camera, then think about how to slide the components in so we can build what we want.

Reply
Caine Mitchell August 31, 2016

And then there’s the “Craft Camera”. Anyone heard any news on that potential offering?

Christian Anderl Reply
Christian Anderl August 31, 2016

As pointed out – the big players got no chance to bring the high end features to the dslr/mirrorless range without killing their own products for pro Video. Time will tell i guess :)

Reply
Tristan Summers August 31, 2016

1. If you start with dslr but get serious about shooting video you start wanting the features of a dedicated video camera, nd, xlr, CONTROL, so dslr video capability can be gateway drug, from 7d to c300, so will always be limited.

2. 4k and beyond is a very useable print size and shooting video for stills may actually become very popular. So not two distinct modes but one.

3. Manufacturers who make both video and stills cameras can spread the RnD costs, scale up manufacture etc. So have the ability to offer options.

Interesting times. Bring back the vx1000

 Beebee Lestr Reply
Beebee Lestr August 31, 2016

Canon… If you are reading this, here’s some advice:

You need to produce a new ‘full-frame’ camera (36mm wide sensor) that video professionals can use. Your C300 and C500 have smaller sensors and are not a replacement.

A new ‘full-frame’ video-friendly camera will work with the EF lens range you already have. Although Canon dedicated cine zooms don’t produce an image big enough for the full-frame sensor, it doesn’t matter. Zooming was fashionable in the 1970s, but many (or most) cinematographers don’t do on-camera zooms these days. We can get by with existing EF varifocal lenses, and are willing to do that to get the full-frame look, and to be able to use ultra-wide angles.

Canon – if you do nothing you’ll see a decline in your SLR sales, as you underestimate the demand for this. You’ll also witness a corresponding rise in Sony full-frame camera sales.

The 5D Mark iv fiasco will actually REDUCE sales of your C-Series video cameras. This is because 5D users acquire large collections of EF lenses, and so the obvious upgrade path is a C100 or C500. Drop the ball on the 5D and you reduce the number of upgraders.

Another side effect will be the collapse of the massive 5D video accessories market, which should alarm companies like Zacuto and others.

Surely the world-wide outrage from Canon 5D users is enough to show that you have made a catastrophically wrong decision. You are not paying attention. You are destroying your market and sending loyal Canon users to Sony.

Ajay Taralkar Reply
Ajay Taralkar August 31, 2016

Nice article… you made me to think.

Reply
Bernard Shaw August 31, 2016

Canon could regain large market share if they realized that the advancing dual pixel sensor has massive possibilities and utility AND that their new patent announced today of a global shutter with instant read out of all pixels could really advance video cameras.

IMHO Canon could stop thinking their cameras compete with each other and adopt Sony idea of all cameras becoming a group that work together. If so they could realize we want both larger cameras for some applications and small form factor cameras and also a camera that shoots both photo and video well.

And I also see evidence for HDR being the most important new development. 4K is nice for us in post to crop and have details but most people have a hard time seeing the difference with average big screen size and living room size.
So Canon should move to integration of all cameras with HDR 422 10 bit useful codecs, wide dynamic range and the killer autofocus dual pixel with a global shutter external ProRes peaking etc.

Doug Marke Reply
Doug Marke September 2, 2016

Canon is definitely trying to kill the dslr video market and force those of us who are in that game down a high end solution…. The problem is, We are in that game because the dslr solution enabled it… We can dramatically reduce Capitol costs by making cross media use of the gear and produce stills and video for our clients of high quality for use in their digital marketing at a far lower cost… And it’s this lower cost that will open up the market to far more production possibilities. Canon are making a mistake if they think that the new markets will spend 5 or 10 k on a bespoke camera, When the quality needed is within reach of a dslr solution, which folks like us who are entirely comfortable with can use effortlessly. We don’t actually need much more quality in terms of broadcast spec and bit depth for our customers, what we need is features… In particular good slow mo….

They enabled a revolution which opened up video to all new markets, If they think they can ignore that they are idiots.

We will swap to Sony and continue to offer high quality content at good value, putting the profit In our pocket not canons.