Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Canon Now Accepting Orders for Spatial Video Lens Previewed at WWDC

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
67,686
38,134


Canon's new stereoscopic RF-S7.8mm F4 STM DUAL camera lens for spatial video recording recently became available for pre-order. In the U.S., pricing is set at $449.99, and orders are estimated to be delivered in mid-November.

Canon-Vision-Pro-Lens.jpg

Apple and Canon announced the lens at WWDC in June. The lens attaches to Canon's EOS R7, enabling the mirrorless camera to record 3D videos for playback on AR/VR headsets like Apple's Vision Pro and Meta's Quest 3. More details about the lens are available on Canon's website, and in our coverage of the WWDC announcement.

After recording spatial videos with the Canon EOS R7 and this lens, Apple said users would be able to edit the videos in Final Cut Pro on the Mac, and upload them to Vimeo. Final Cut Pro will likely be updated with spatial video editing capabilities in mid-November, and Vimeo released a Vision Pro app with spatial video support last month.

Spatial video can also be recorded on both iPhone 15 Pro models and all iPhone 16 models, with no additional hardware required.

Article Link: Canon Now Accepting Orders for Spatial Video Lens Previewed at WWDC
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2024/11/03/canon-spatial-video-lens-pre-orders/
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SFjohn
Who is making content for the 5 people that own and actually still use an AVP?

If the AVP isn't a consumer-level product, then why is Canon making consumer-level lenses for consumer-level cameras to produce consumer-level content for Vimeo that can only be viewed on an AVP?

Meta users aren't going to care about this unless it's for porn. They buy VR headsets for gaming.
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
  • Haha
Reactions: miguel cortez, PowerButton, michaelnugent and 15 others
zorinlynx said:
Aren't the lenses too close together for proper 3D cinematography? The distance should be about the same as the average distance between our own eyes, I believe.

Is that even far enough apart for there to be enough parallax for a proper stereoscopic view?
Click to expand...
I agree. I definitely see a difference recording spatial video with my iPhone, which has the two lenses pretty close together, would compared with recording from the Vision Pro itself. Those lenses are about as far away as my eyes.
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: Nugget, Ommid, UnbreakableAlex and 1 other person
wikiverse said:
Who is making content for the 5 people that own and actually still use an AVP?

If the AVP isn't a consumer-level product, then why is Canon making consumer-level lenses for consumer-level cameras to produce consumer-level content for Vimeo that can only be viewed on an AVP?

Meta users aren't going to care about this unless it's for porn. They buy VR headsets for gaming.
Click to expand...
Apple has to help provide the tools for this new paradigm if they want to make it financially feasible as a platform and for the average content creator to create content.

Let's remember that unlike the iPhone, where there already was a vibrant marketplace and demand for cellular phones, with Vision Pro, Apple jumped head-first into the deep end of a market that couldn't fill an inflatable kids pool. They need to put a lot of effort into making it work.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ZZ9pluralZalpha, parameter, miguel cortez and 14 others
zorinlynx said:
Aren't the lenses too close together for proper 3D cinematography? The distance should be about the same as the average distance between our own eyes, I believe.

Is that even far enough apart for there to be enough parallax for a proper stereoscopic view?
Click to expand...
This is what I’ve always wondered about spatial video for the iPhone. Anytime you see it done in 3D movies behind the scenes they always have the camera rig spaced further apart like human eyes, maybe even a little more. Back in college I was a photography student for a while (minor, switched to design) and for fun I would make red/blue 3D photos in PS and it always looked better if I took the photos further apart. I would just do it unscientifically by moving my tripod by small amounts. Smaller distances for closer objects and larger distances for further away objects like mountains, if I remember right. That’s probably why they always show spatial video being shot indoors: smaller distance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SFjohn, SantaFeNM, michaelnugent and 5 others
wikiverse said:
If the AVP isn't a consumer-level product, then why is Canon making consumer-level lenses for consumer-level cameras to produce consumer-level content for Vimeo that can only be viewed on an AVP?
Click to expand...

Because Canon already makes a dual-fisheye lens for their full frame cameras. It costs $2000. This lens costs less than a quarter of that, and it works on their also less expensive APS-C cameras. It opens up the market to more creators.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nugget, Harry Haller, locovaca and 2 others
  • Like
Reactions: SFjohn
It would be much better if people could edit a 3D video with a 3D headset, namely Apple Vision Pro.
I've said it already, but I truly think apple should rethink and release a version of all its apps for Vision Pro, including the professional ones.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SFjohn, arkitect and UnbreakableAlex
One of the problems with this thing is you'd never be allowed to bring it into a concert or sporting event. I shot a few songs at the U2 show at the Sphere last year with my Insta360 One X. Didn't have any trouble getting it into the venue, but the quality on YT and on the AVP is poor, to say the least. When I watch the video natively on my iphone it's much sharper.
 
Le0M said:
It would be much better if people could edit a 3D video with a 3D headset, namely Apple Vision Pro.
I've said it already, but I truly think apple should rethink and release a version of all its apps for Vision Pro, including the professional ones.
Click to expand...
They should, but it's a good and a bad business decision at the same time, because even they, most likely, are not 100% confident in the AVP vision succeeding, and it'd be costly and time consuming to do so.
 
Noice.
Instantly turn your camera into Peppa Pig.

It's still a joke that you can't use this lens on any other camera. Like using anamorphic lenses, it should just be a software problem to be able to turn a double image into a stereoscopic one. It shouldn't be that hard.

So much effort going into a dead product.

Entertainment, while key, will not save this product category whether it's from Apple or Meta.

1st issue: every good game or experience was bought by Meta, killing all the energy this new-born market had. Instead of cultivating this dev community, they have just killed them. What's the point of building something for a platform that is dead or locked? There were a few winners, but they have no future because where can they go outside of Meta ? The Steam/Vive ecosystem is dead, the PSVR is dying, and Apple has still to figure out that every game can't be played like Chess, once you've done your RE Village on a console you don't want to replay it elsewhere.


2nd issue: it's damn isolating. Nothing has been done to be able to use this device in a family or professional context. It's still to this day a single man's wet dream, not a consumer product. Nobody around you can figure out what you're doing, if they can even talk to you or are intruding in your experience. You can't show them what you are doing.
One good of that front screen would have been to display useful info for OTHERS, like your status, a vignette of your experience, anything tat could be relevant. But no, the greed of these companies want every single one of you to have a device. Sharing is a big no-no.


3rd issue: for any kind of productivity advantage to exist, it should make use of the 3D space and be persistent. If your environment resets every time you power on your device, it's just useless. Imagine arrive at your office and your desk, furniture, computer and documents are all back in their own package and you have to reinstall everything. You can even have the icons on your dock or desktop back at the same place. People customize their experience to their liking and to what they need to do. Remove that ability or just don't build it, and now you are fighting against the product.

None of these issues are addressed.
 
  • Disagree
  • Like
Reactions: lilkwarrior, Jumpthesnark and arkitect
Dredd67 said:
2nd issue: it's damn isolating. Nothing has been done to be able to use this device in a family or professional context. It's still to this day a single man's wet dream, not a consumer product. Nobody around you can figure out what you're doing, if they can even talk to you or are intruding in your experience. You can't show them what you are doing.
One good of that front screen would have been to display useful info for OTHERS, like your status, a vignette of your experience, anything tat could be relevant. But no, the greed of these companies want every single one of you to have a device. Sharing is a big no-no.
Click to expand...
Reason #2 is the biggest fail for me. It is isolating. It's expensive. They said this would be the next form of computing, but I believe they're wrong. It needed to be something like Iron Man where you interact within the real world, but trapping it all within a device that only one person can do anything with is a failure. They focused so much on jam packing tech into it, but forgot about the practicality of it all. I believe Meta is ahead of Apple in this environment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: eifelbube, Dredd67 and arkitect
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back