It has been widely reported (and we think incorrectly so) that the Canon EOS-1D X and the Canon EOS 1D C are physically the same camera and only separated by a difference in firmware – implying that Canon is charging about $7000 for the additional 4k in the firmware. We haven’t reported it as we couldn’t find any other source (including several contacts within Canon) that indicated it was true. The story has been repeated over and over without anything more than a single conversation with one source.
Well canonrumors.com beat me to it – they’ve concluded that the two cameras are indeed not the same physically.
While the DIGIC V processors, image sensor and AF module are all identical to the EOS-1D C, there is in fact “reworked circuitry and design to dissipate heat for the 4K recording”.
The EOS-1D C isn’t just firmware
There have been reports around the web that the upcoming Canon EOS-1D C is the exact same camera internally as the EOS-1D X (other than the PC sync port) and Canon is just charging people $7000 for different firmware.
I have spent considerable time trying to find someone at Canon to clarify the reports as well as someone to open their EOS-1D C (no one would do that for me!). The information I have received backs up what Canon said at the development announcement of the EOS-1D C, it does in fact have a different hardware configuration inside. While the DIGIC V processors, image sensor and AF module are all identical to the EOS-1D C, there is in fact “reworked circuitry and design to dissipate heat for the 4K recording”.
So is the reworking of the internals worth the additional $7K? If it’s required for the 4K resolution, and the 4K performance is top notch, then I don’t see why it’s not. This camera is targeted to professionals and priced accordingly. Volume sales of this camera will be far lower than the EOS-1D X, which probably makes the cost of production higher.
There are a few people I know that will open the EOS-1D C when they get their hands on it, I know I will be. That’s going to be the only way to 100% prove the internals are indeed different. I do wish Canon would clarify this point and put it to rest, which they may do when the camera is officially announced.
What are your thoughts?
I agree with canonrumors and I’ve urged Canon USA on many occasions to openly address this issue as I didn’t believe the original report (and that’s why I never reported it). Do you agree or do you think Canon is really trying to charge $7k for the firmware? Sound off in the comments!
(cover photo credit: snap from the canonrumors.com site)
Latest posts by planetMitch (see all)
- Chuck Westfall Interview with the Canon C100 Mark II - January 28, 2015
- Back Up Your Hard Drives – don’t be a fool and lose vital data! - January 28, 2015
- Global Cinematography Institute – something for you? by Mimi Fuenzalida - January 27, 2015