Will canon produce an interchangeable lens video camera

.....discounting current canon DSLR of course

Reason being is I saw the sony NEX VG10 and it made me wonder. Why not canon? I don't have sony lenses, I have canon ones!

I'm in a situation where I'm after a video camera.......I absolutely love the vids coming off canons DSLR range nowdays, esp after using the bro in laws new 7D today, but hated the sloooow autofocus for the faster things in life, so would not buy one for video as such.

I don't even know if there are any drawbacks to the sony system, or my mystical Canon one, just thinking out aloud.

So how about it Mr. Canon? How about a video camera body with the same nice DOF effects one can get with a 7D or whatever your flavour of "D", and takes my current and future EOS lenses and is purely a full HD video camera.

dear god I hope so. It needs to happen. But will it? I dunno.

The only question is, how much video camera do you want or need? The Panasonic AF100 and Sony PMW F3 are both full-fledged camcorders with interchangeable mounts for almost any type of lens and have roughly 4/3rds and APS-C sized sensors respectively, but they also cost $4,800 and $13,000 respectively. This type of camera is already on the market, do you simply want one with "Canon" written across the side?

Actually $4800.00 isn't that much. $13,000.00 is a little steep for the benefits I could use.
My guess is that a Canon would be somewhere in the middle if it were to come out.

All the good video cameras have interchangeable lenses.

I guess they dont make a camera like the old XL2 that also could get the adapter to use EF lenses

Sam6644 wrote in post #11917958
All the good video cameras have interchangeable lenses.

Indeed, All the good video cameras can also use any lens via adapter as well, though I believe what the OP meant was "Is there a camera with a dSLR sized sensor that with native support for still camera lenses?", in which case there are four: The AF100, F3, RED and Alexa. (Though you wouldn't really want to be using Canon glass on the latter two)

Given his reference to the NEX-VG10 camera, I think he's talking about something that's a camcorder but with variable lenses. The price point would be similar to a DSLR, probably ~$1500-2000 for "body only."

Chippy569 wrote in post #11918765
Given his reference to the NEX-VG10 camera, I think he's talking about something that's a camcorder but with variable lenses. The price point would be similar to a DSLR, probably ~$1500-2000 for "body only."

I'm having a hard time getting why someone would want a camera like that. For $1500~2000 it most likely won't have much more than what you already get in a dSLR except maybe a few video-specific features, such as recording for over 30 minutes, and a more convenient form-factor.

and 3-color CCD with no rolling shutter, and a more editor-friendly codec...

Chippy569 wrote in post #11919708
and 3-color CCD with no rolling shutter, and a more editor-friendly codec...

Three APS-C size CCDs, pro codec, compact design and all for $2000? Maybe in 2020. The Sony PMW-500 has three 2/3" CCDs, a pro codec, and is a full ENG cam, but dang if it isn't $25k and you don't get a lens or viewfinder either.

Kolor-Pikker wrote in post #11917800
The only question is, how much video camera do you want or need? The Panasonic AF100 and Sony PMW F3 are both full-fledged camcorders with interchangeable mounts for almost any type of lens and have roughly 4/3rds and APS-C sized sensors respectively, but they also cost $4,800 and $13,000 respectively. This type of camera is already on the market, do you simply want one with "Canon" written across the side?

I thought I mentioned it in my first post. Quality of current DSLR, but with a focusing system that doesn't take a week to rack from MFD to infinity.

I couldn't care less what was written on the side of it, I just want to be able to use my lenses on it. Sony have the one I mentioned for about $3K (with a lens too I think, but admittedly prob "kit lens quality"), and I reckon I'd pay that for a video camera that allows the use of my current lenses. If Sony can do it why not Canon? I wasn't aware of the other two you mentioned, but $4800 is too much for my pocket, let alone 13K!!

Kolor-Pikker wrote in post #11919606
I'm having a hard time getting why someone would want a camera like that. For $1500~2000 it most likely won't have much more than what you already get in a dSLR except maybe a few video-specific features, such as recording for over 30 minutes, and a more convenient form-factor.

how about the ability to fast focus the same as my DSLR? That is the ONLY thing I don't like about DSLR video.......and the fact you have to use it like a point and shoot via the screen or throw a chunky eyepiece on the back which is what the bro in law has bought. DSLR cameras make awesome qual vids, but only if you really want to film flowers blowing in the breeze. I want that quality with a focussing system my still camera has......I am obviously asking too much!!

If canon can make a still/video camera with the features of a 7D for $2K surely they can build a pure video only body for similar money?

they're cooking up with something.

what's up with the ccd? let tell you, you're not going find large sensor ccd camcorder. read some articles why RED went with CMOS. now every big boy are using CMOS including Arri and hispeed cam phantom. when RED first release everybody was wondering why not ccd

pixelbasher wrote in post #11920259
I thought I mentioned it in my first post. Quality of current DSLR, but with a focusing system that doesn't take a week to rack from MFD to infinity.

I couldn't care less what was written on the side of it, I just want to be able to use my lenses on it. Sony have the one I mentioned for about $3K (with a lens too I think, but admittedly prob "kit lens quality"), and I reckon I'd pay that for a video camera that allows the use of my current lenses. If Sony can do it why not Canon? I wasn't aware of the other two you mentioned, but $4800 is too much for my pocket, let alone 13K!!

how about the ability to fast focus the same as my DSLR? That is the ONLY thing I don't like about DSLR video.......and the fact you have to use it like a point and shoot via the screen or throw a chunky eyepiece on the back which is what the bro in law has bought. DSLR cameras make awesome qual vids, but only if you really want to film flowers blowing in the breeze. I want that quality with a focussing system my still camera has......I am obviously asking too much!!

If canon can make a still/video camera with the features of a 7D for $2K surely they can build a pure video only body for similar money?

Well, ok, but autofocus isn't really something that gets any better in camcorders even with more expensive cams, in fact, it's the opposite. Anything over $9000 is strictly manual focus.

yea expensive cams dont have autofocus and the higher the price they all can have interchangeable lenses but at that price point when using cine quality lenses the glass is going to cost more that what i bet your car is probably worth.