Canon & Arri - Going Down?

[Zack Birlew]

Hi, everybody, so I’ve been looking at some of the recent news and releases from Canon and Arri lately and I have to admit I’m a little concerned.

Arri is shutting down a Japanese office and service center due to the cost ratio of the Japanese Yen at the moment and some comments and rumors mentioned possible budget cuts and convention attendance cuts happening as well. Also, as I’ve stated before as a sticking point for Arri, most of the competition has released or is soon releasing new 6K, 8K, 12K, and even 17K resolution camera options and Arri has made no mention of moving beyond 4K or even another rendition of their unique Alexa 65.

Canon has released the C400 which is a 6K version of their love-it-or-hate-it C200 and is priced just as foolishly as the C200 was and is more than likely to be repriced just as quickly as Sony is rumored to launch their own 6K and even 8K upgrades for their hit FX and mirrorless lines soon.

On top of that, the rumors of the Canon R5 Mark II and the Canon R1 being woefully underwhelming compared to competing options from Sony and Nikon as well as even some older camera releases including Canon’s own firmware updated R5 Mark I, is not only a hit on their brand but also their lens business for the adoption of the RF mount. The RF mount is still very much on an island of its own in terms of third-party support due to Canon’s own recent ecosystem lockdown which, in and of itself, was already troubling.

With the Canon R5C already on the mark, Canon needed to stick with 8K going forward but the release and pricing of the C400 is a sign that they are going to make everyone wait for the 8K versions until the very last minute. With the R5 Mark II soon to be released, the R5C Mark II shouldn’t be too far behind but with more competing options being released with internal Prores RAW and/or BRAW and now N-RAW as well as external RAW modes, resolution alone won’t be enough to stay competitive for long.

So, if Canon‘s new cameras flop and Arri can’t compete anytime soon, what are everyone’s thoughts on their futures? Could we see a broadcast/film world without Arri? A broadcast/film world without Canon? Will they be okay or could this be the point that one or both companies exits the market?

I am optimistic that this could just be a slow time or just a bad slate of releases but the move to 8K and beyond gets stronger every day and with the amount of time it took to get something new from either Canon or Arri, they could get left in the dust if they’re not careful. The current bad economy fueling a cutdown in costs of production and even the amount of production is also not the best time to delay releases or provide late to the market product releases at high end pricing. Canon’s already done this and Arri is a question mark and I’m just saying, under these conditions and with the surprise acquisition of RED shaking up the market, it’s clear that anything can happen at this point.

 

[Brian Timmons]

Our industry, like many industries, is undergoing a bit of changes so I do agree that there is a wide range of possibilities for how things can play out.

My greater concern is what I think are the orchestrated circumstances behind these changes, the potential end goals,
and the people behind it. That’s another conversation.

With that established, ARRI is over 100 years old and has survived 2 world wars in it‘s first 25 years of existence.
The odds are great that they will be fine but again who knows.

From what I’ve seen so far the C400 looks like a decent camera.
6K is more than what many people ask for in a camera and some consider 8K and above to be more a burden in terms of storage and processing needed than what they prefer to deal with.
C400 does seem sensitive to underexposing.

RED’s current lineup is already solid. Outside of some hardware accessories, they might get a bit of mileage just focusing on firmware enhancements and backend update like updates in REDcode debayering.

I honestly wouldn’t be mad if manufacturers pumped the brakes a little on camera releases.

Brian Timmons
BRITIM/MEDIA

 

[shashbugu]

Too many cameras being released, gives buyers wait and see attitudes. It’s the same with lights.
Three large studios, Paramount, Disney and Warner are looking at medium tier productions and will be spending less on future productions. Fox seizes to exist. Arri is Alexa 35 should have been large format 6-8k for the price. It’s a very very hard sell to pay 100k in 2023-24 for a 4k camera.

Canon will sellout of C400’s, it’s what documentary filmmakers want. Better to have three cameras at the price of one Burano. Canon users are definitely waiting for a DGO 8.6k version in the form factor.

 

[Steve Sherrick]

Too many cameras being released, gives buyers wait and see attitudes. It’s the same with lights.
Three large studios, Paramount, Disney and Warner are looking at medium tier productions and will be spending less on future productions. Fox seizes to exist. Arri is Alexa 35 should have been large format 6-8k for the price. It’s a very very hard sell to pay 100k in 2023-24 for a 4k camera.

Canon will sellout of C400’s, it’s what documentary filmmakers want. Better to have three cameras at the price of one Burano. Canon users are definitely waiting for a DGO 8.6k version in the form factor.

Looking at medium tier productions may not be the worst thing in the world, if they also focus on finding amazing scripts that lead to great movies that people fall in love with. Personally, I'd rather see a $20 million dollar movie that makes me feel something than a $200 million dollar movie that makes me feel like it was an okay way to kill a couple of hours. The reality is, movies can be made for less money these days but what is still hard to find are great writers, the ones who provide the stories that stand the test of time.

 

[M Harvey]

Looking at medium tier productions may not be the worst thing in the world, if they also focus on finding amazing scripts that lead to great movies that people fall in love with. Personally, I'd rather see a $20 million dollar movie that makes me feel something than a $200 million dollar movie that makes me feel like it was an okay way to kill a couple of hours. The reality is, movies can be made for less money these days but what is still hard to find are great writers, the ones who provide the stories that stand the test of time.

I feel the same way you do-- I wish there were more $20M movies and fewer superhero movies, young adult franchise adaptations, and "reboots" of old material. We had sort of a golden era of movies with mid-tier budgets in the late 90s into the 2000s, when filmmakers who proved themselves at film festivals like Sundance began making studio movies with stars (thinking of people like Cuaron, del Toro and Innaritu, P.T. Anderson, Tarantino, Payne, David O. Russell) and a new generation of comedy talent came to the fore (thinking of ADVENTURELAND and SUPER BAD, the first few Judd Apatow movies, etc.).

That said, I worked for a long time at a studio, and $20M movies can be a great way to lose a lot of money-- and even the successful ones struggle to generate the kinds of returns you need to keep a studio going. $100M+ movies are actually seen as a safer bet, so long as they have a large scale, simple stories that translate internationally, built-in familiarity with the IP-- and franchise potential. Even when these movies don't do huge box office business, the familiarity (with a comic book character or a popular toy or previous movie) helps audiences find them on streaming or TV.
The larger budget helps create scale that distinguishes these movies from the high quality TV series that have become common over the past 20 years. And with a $20M movie not based on existing IP, if they aren't a hit theatrically, then they have a tendency to disappear altogether. If they are a hit-- well, what's the franchise potential? What's part 2 or 3 of JUNO or GARDEN STATE?
The reason these movies are interesting to you and me is connected to what makes them risky. These mid-tier movies still exist-- think CHALLENGERS, THE BIKE RIDERS, HOLDOVERS, THE FAVORITE, LALA LAND, or EVERYTHING EVERYWHERE. But I think more exist as $3-5M movies-- or even less--, like MOONLIGHT, SAINT MAUD, BOTTOMS, THE FAREWELL.

But to return to the theme of the thread: I think virtually all of these mid-tier movies rented camera packages that would have cost $100k+ to purchase. And even if they got great deals, it made sense as part of a package with the lenses. If we're talking about cameras that cost $8k to purchase, I think that's significantly owner-operator territory and documentary world. The cost pressures of microbudget filmmaking is probably where these owner-operator cameras really come into conversation with narrative feature filmmaking-- I myself shot one sub-$100k feature on Komodo (we rented great lenses and not much else), and the Komodo X is a likely option on an upcoming sub-$1M project. (I'd rather shoot on something easier to use with a crew, but I think the image can hang with the big boys, so it may be worth the trade if it gets the director an extra day or a little more production design.)