# Review: Canon XC10 With Footage



## Canon Rumors Guy (May 15, 2015)

```
The most talked about product from Canon at NAB was the XC10 camera, both for good and bad reasons. I have been on the fence about the XC10 and decided to wait for some reviews.</p>
<p>Cinema5D has posted a first impressions review with footage from the Canon XC10.</p>
<p>From Johnnie Behiri:</p>
<blockquote><p>All in all I would expect a market leader like Canon to deliver a more solid product especially when the price tag is so high for what it is. I can sum up that working with the XC10 was simply tiring for me. Too much menu fiddling and “worries” about staying in focus but hey, who said that the way to produce nice looking images should be easy ….</p></blockquote>
<p>This review is not a glowing puff piece, it’s a pretty negative look at what was initially perceived as a strange product from Canon, especially when the $2499 USD price tag is considered.</p>
<p><strong><a href="http://www.cinema5d.com/canon-xc10-footage-first-impressions-and-review/" target="_blank">Read the full review</a> | <a href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1134581-REG/canon_0565c013_xc10.html/bi/2466/kbid/3296" target="_blank">Preorder the Canon XC10 at B&H Photo</a></strong></p>
```


----------



## KrisK (May 15, 2015)

I was initially thrilled when I heard about this camera...a smallish sensor with high DR, good color depth, 4K, fixed lens...but have to admit that the negatives are starting to mount.

The jet landings look great, far more filmic than footage I've seen from Sony's X70 (which I'd been considering,) with none of the weirdly harsh highlight clipping that seems unique to Sony's 1" cameras.

But his point about the ineffectiveness of the clip-on loupe is worrisome, and while I'd not considered the 'slow' lens to be much of an issue...I'm usually stopping down for dof, anyway...the inaccessibility of manual control has me rethinking this.

Still, I'd really like to see some controlled, high-ISO footage that hasn't been pushed-around in post.


----------



## jeffa4444 (May 15, 2015)

Interesting. Clearly not a challenger to Black Magic and no self respecting DOP wants a zoom with a variable aperture its a lighting nightmare.


----------



## Phenix205 (May 15, 2015)

Canon's flop may actually benefit the consumers if the price drops significantly, just like the EOS-M, which was way overpriced initially but ended up as a great compact and CHEAP APS-C camera.


----------



## Tinky (May 15, 2015)

The f-drop and the cost of storage killed it for me.

Well, that and I don't need 4K just yet.


----------



## LOALTD (May 15, 2015)

Phenix205 said:


> Canon's flop may actually benefit the consumers if the price drops significantly, just like the EOS-M, which was way overpriced initially but ended up as a great compact and CHEAP APS-C camera.




+1


I love my EOS-M (for $250)


And I would love one of these! (for $500)


----------



## gregory4000 (May 15, 2015)

The review is this this camera has issues that professionals will stay away from.
Even amertures want an easy camera to use. 
This is going to bomb. 
Every company has some!


----------



## Tugela (May 15, 2015)

Cinema5D are not the most objective reviewers around, but they do like Canon, so if they are being critical it is pretty telling.


----------



## ajperk (May 15, 2015)

I'm not a video kind of guy, so maybe more video oriented forum users can provide some commentary:

I have gotten the impression over the past several years that Canon seems to be stumbling a lot in the video arena. Every release appears to either be considerably more expensive than the direct competition, or is considerably crippled relative to the direct competition. Is this impression accurate?

I am particularly curious because I have heard a LOT of complaints about Canon's stills products, usually regarding the sensors (i.e. DR and shadow noise) but also with regards to crippling for greater product differentiation. Regardless, I have personally been satisfied with the Canon DSLRs I've owned and used.

Anyway, to the point: Is Canon really stumbling and bumbling these video product releases, or is this more an issue of Canon having a different idea as to what compromises to make and what strengths to focus on and since that's always going to leave someone unhappy you will of course mostly hear about what's not there?


----------



## Tinky (May 15, 2015)

ajperk said:


> I have gotten the impression over the past several years that Canon seems to be stumbling a lot in the video arena. Every release appears to either be considerably more expensive than the direct competition, or is considerably crippled relative to the direct competition. Is this impression accurate?



I don't think it is all that fair.

Nikon launched the first DSLR with video in the shape of the D90, Canon quickly followed with the 5D2 and the 500D. The close proximity of these products does not infer a reaction release, i.e. just to keep up with Nikon, as the R&D would have probably taken place over years not months, or weeks.

The Nikon had a few caveats, single frame rate, 720 resolution etc, but even the hallowed 5D2 was imperfect at launch, no PAL friendly frame rates, no manual exposure (until a later firmware fixed this), the 500D was even worse, with reduced 20fps frame rate and full auto exposure.

It actually took until the 7D before Canon launched a sorted design that didn't feel like an afterthought. The full frame rates were there, including a PAL friendly 25fps. Full exposure modes. And it was also, for it's time, a cracking stills camera offering pretty decent value.

Canon also had a major advantage in terms of the mount, RED, the early large sensor camera pioneer, had EF mount versions of it's cameras. You could use the stills lenses you already had, or you could buy very decent lenses for less than their PL equivalents.



ajperk said:


> I am particularly curious because I have heard a LOT of complaints about Canon's stills products, usually regarding the sensors (i.e. DR and shadow noise) but also with regards to crippling for greater product differentiation. Regardless, I have personally been satisfied with the Canon DSLRs I've owned and used.



I think Canon were caught unawares with the success of their new videoDSLRs, and the new market they virtually created (a complete ready to shoot 550D for example was the 10th of the price of a RED body) and so hadn't figured on including decent audio connects, headphone sockets, or things like manual timecode, zebra, peaking and so on and so on.

Canon did launch some more dedicated video cameras based around an APS-C sensor, and with an EF mount (PL versions were also available) and yes, compared to a 550D they looked like poor value. To a stills market obsessed with so called full frame, APS-C seemed like a daft choice for the money (no matter that it is closer to s35, and so fits nice with PL mount s35 lenses) but were actually excellent. Great to use. All the connectivity you could want. Stable codecs. Brilliant in low light. But not exciting in the same way that flakey black magic launches were.

People who thought the C300 was overpriced should have looked at comparable REDs or Alexas. The c300 was not aimed at photographers who fancied themselves as DoPs (biiiiiiig difference) the c300 was aimed at film-makers. To whom c300 was half the price of the XDCAMs they had been using.

Enterprising folks like MagicLantern added some of the display functionality that pros wanted, making the 550ds and the 5D2s far more usable (focus peaking, particularly on a large sensor is a godsend) I don't think canon were intentionally leaving these things out, just that they still saw there primary use as stills, and were making some very nice XF codec based camcorders and brilliant cinema series cameras for the folk who they thought should be buying them.

I don't see a conspiracy. Behind the curve perhaps. A knock on effect of the terrible earthquakes and tsunamis that devastated swathes of Japan, things just slowed down.

Canon stuck with the 18MP sensor for too long, whilst Panasonic were doing reasonably great things with their GH series, folk spending daft money on hyperfast primes.. it seemed Canon were lagging behind.

I think they still are in terms of marketing, but then I don't think the market is particularly crying out for a cheap 4K camera just yet. I hope canon launch something better sorted than we've seen from the a7s and gh4. It's not the XC10 by the looks of things. It'll be the 5D4 or the next rebel. And it won't need CFast 2.0.

EVERYBODY scoffed at Canon when they launched the c300. No 4k they scoffed. What did everybody at a broadcast level end up using? The c300. That was a single cost. A single box. One record button. Everything built in. Great images.

Canon are being very sensible, generally. in my opinion. They kind of fudged the 5D2 and 500D... and I hope will spend more time getting it right for 4K.


----------



## ajperk (May 15, 2015)

Thank you very much for that detailed and interesting reply! This is why I love this forum. 



Tinky said:


> ajperk said:
> 
> 
> > I have gotten the impression over the past several years that Canon seems to be stumbling a lot in the video arena. Every release appears to either be considerably more expensive than the direct competition, or is considerably crippled relative to the direct competition. Is this impression accurate?
> ...


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 16, 2015)

ajperk said:


> I'm not a video kind of guy, so maybe more video oriented forum users can provide some commentary:
> 
> I have gotten the impression over the past several years that Canon seems to be stumbling a lot in the video arena. Every release appears to either be considerably more expensive than the direct competition, or is considerably crippled relative to the direct competition. Is this impression accurate?



More or less I think it is. The comments haven't been so kind on movie and video forums for anything other than some Cxx stuff. And I think they tend to be more honest on those forums since the video/movie people tend to be less bending over backwards to defend every marketing decision a company makes just because it has "their" brand name on it.

I mean just look at how they still refer to basic usability features like zoomed focusing box, focusing peaking, zebras as 'extreme high-end features'. It took tons of pressure from the biggest names around on top of every forum going up in flames to get them, kicking and screaming, to even agree to update 5D2 firmware to give the video manual control (although it does seem they were legit surprised to initially learn people might want manual control for video in the 5D2, which alone signals how utterly out of touch they are and how it's all photography clueless MBAs running the show over there these days).

(not that Nikon has really pushed things forward for video all that much; they do push stills forward these days at least though; Canon seems intent to push out top of the top and interesting lenses and then use that, and their nice user interface, to get away with maximum milking, crippling, not bothering in most other regards)


And look at this camera, for just 20% more BM has announced a videocamera that has an APS-C sized sensor and that takes EF Canon lenses and seems to outspec this Canon in every single way, the only downside (which could be major for some) is that the BM one does weigh a decent bit more. I'd be shocked if the BM video didn't look better than the samples from this have looked so far too (although it's hard to say if it's the vimeo compression or weird editing choices that leave the early X10 samples looking so so in some ways, DR looks poor and it sometimes goes to that DNR, waxy, weird look, although it seems pretty clean from aliasing and moire and not overly crispy fake, but yet a little with the fake too much DNR squishy fakeness at times.)


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 16, 2015)

Tinky said:


> Enterprising folks like MagicLantern added some of the display functionality that pros wanted, making the 550ds and the 5D2s far more usable (focus peaking, particularly on a large sensor is a godsend) * I don't think canon were intentionally leaving these things out,*



hah! (remember it's not just that they left it out of the initial 5D2, but everything else too, and people have begged and pleaded and pointed it out to them a zillion times)

heck they've out and out said they left it out of all the recent DSLRs because those are 'very high-end' features that they feel should be reserved only for the top most end products, even the $12,000 1DC didn't get them!!

And look at AutoISO, such a little dinky feature, but they dribble out the ten minutes of coding and 20 lines of code over a DECADE before marketing dared to let them finally implement it more or less fully (with the 7D2), other makers had it done reasonably right in their Rebel-like stuff years ago.


----------



## Tinky (May 16, 2015)

Hi LetTheRightLensIn

I understand your frustration, and I'm not blind to Canons faults, but I have a perspective on a couple of your points, which I'd like to share. Each to their own and all that, but I disagree with a couple of your points..



> for just 20% more BM has announced a videocamera that has an APS-C sized sensor and that takes EF Canon lenses and seems to outspec this Canon in every single way, the only downside (which could be major for some) is that the BM one does weigh a decent bit more.



BM announce lots of things. They announced the BMD4K whilst most pre-orders were still waiting for their BMD2.5K's. They announced their URSA mini before most folk have seen an URSA in the wild.

If the URSA mini has the BMD 4K sensor, then... well. 

BMD don't sell complete solutions. Add a battery adaptor. Add a battery system. Add a charger. Add a lens. 

Suddenly that 20% is more like 100% to get something that works.

Thats irrelevant to any critique of the XC10, BMD promise much, they don't always get to the shops in a reasonable time, and don't always work in a reasonable way when they do. My relationship with blackmagic goes back at least 15 years using their very fine video cards. I wouldn't buy a BMD camera at the minute as anything other than as a curio. And I'd be unlikely to find any shop that can sell me an NAB model before the next NAB. Based on previous performances.


> heck they've out and out said they left it out of all the recent DSLRs because those are 'very high-end' features that they feel should be reserved only for the top most end products, even the $12,000 1DC didn't get them!!



I agree with Canon that things like focus peaking are high end. Most folk want to use AF, where focus peaking has no relevance. Professionals will want MF and will appreciate focus peaking, and will pay to have it.

Should canon add a menu that caters to a vast minority of users? Perhaps. But I can understand why they wouldn't. To use magic lantern properly you would probably want twice the buttons.... it really would screw up the carefully evolved stills form factor.

I've never ever considered the 1DC a serious video camera. Its a DSLR max. And suffers from the very same caveats and compromises that a 550D suffers from. If I was spending that kind of money on a video camera, that would be bottom of my list... fixed grip, (try balancing that with a xlr interface and 70-200 f2.8) fixed LCD etc. The 1DC is for photojournalists doing a bit of video. It's not a film making tool.

I'm used to ENG cameras, with a universal layout, universal switchgear, interchangable almost between Sony, Panasonic, Grass Valley, Ikegami whatever, sdi in, tc in, black balance, manual TC, XLR audio, mixed WB and ND filter wheels etc....

I would regard all of these things fairly essential to a video user at a certain level, but would expect none of them on a rebel. 

The truth is that a C300 is cheap compared to what an SD digi790 used to cost.... I've spent more on a zoom demand than a 5D3 costs.

I can't see any reason for a rebel to have focus peaking out the box. Although I'm very glad that ML have made that possible.


----------



## KrisK (May 16, 2015)

ajperk said:


> Is Canon really stumbling and bumbling these video product releases, or is this more an issue of Canon having a different idea as to what compromises to make and what strengths to focus on and since that's always going to leave someone unhappy you will of course mostly hear about what's not there?



Whatever Canon's doing, I wouldn't call it stumbling, and a lot of criticism sounds to me like a collective "dammit, they're not making EXACTLY the camera I want."

But no headphone jack (!) or peaking on the 70D, an ostensibly video-friendly camera for enthusiasts? I'd argue those are both basic at this point. And it took them quite a long time to roll out 60p, even in their camcorders.

Put it this way: I bought my 40D because it had live-view, the first, I think, excluding that astro 20Da. And I bought my HV20 as an SD camcorder, though it was one of the first to offer HD.

In each case Canon gave me new features that I enjoyed learning how to use in new and interesting ways.

Now, however, it seems like Canon is shortchanging me on features I already know how to use and need; feature's they're capable of producing and the competition is offering.

Something's changed at HQ.


----------



## dash2k8 (May 16, 2015)

And I was so looking forward to this as a crash cam. Oh well...


----------



## Tinky (May 16, 2015)

instead we have a car crash of acam....


----------



## David_in_Seattle (May 16, 2015)

ajperk said:


> I'm not a video kind of guy, so maybe more video oriented forum users can provide some commentary:
> 
> I have gotten the impression over the past several years that Canon seems to be stumbling a lot in the video arena. Every release appears to either be considerably more expensive than the direct competition, or is considerably crippled relative to the direct competition. Is this impression accurate?
> 
> ...



For perspective: 
I started my photo/video career with a Canon T2i/550D back in 2010 then stepped up to a 5Dmk2 and 7D. Now I use the 5dmk3 and 1dx primarily for location based photo work and have transitioned to a Sony a7s and a7mk2 for travel photos and videos while also transitioning from the Canon C300 mk1 and C100 mk1 to two Sony FS7's for live studio recording (occasionally, I have to setup live interviews for cable news).

I think many video prosumers and working professionals want a camera that can "do it all" such as being able to capture fantastic photos as well as be a versatile camcorder that produces a cinematic look because of it's easy ability to create a shallow depth of field and record at 24p (ntsc) or 25p (pal). Between 2009 - 2012, Canon DSLRs fit the bill for many photographers experimenting with video as well as indie film makers gaining access to more affordable cameras that have a cinematic look when traditional cinematic camcorders cost at least 5 times the price.

As the democratization of video production progressed, with more people venturing into the genre, they started to demand the features found in traditional camcorders such as focus peeking, zebras, 1080/60p, built-in ND filters, high quality preamps for audio recording, high dynamic range color profiles etc. Canon answered by creating the cinema line (C100, C300, C500) while Panasonic and Sony (market leaders in professional camcorders) started introducing said features into much of their lineup. The Sony APS-C a5100 has focus peeking, zebras, and 1080/60p at the price of $500 while the least expensive APS-C/Super 35 camera that Canon offers with these three features (and more) is the C100mk2, but costs $5,000. 

We know Canon has the ability to add focus peeking, zebras, and 1080/60p to all of their DSLRs because magic lantern has been able to add them into some of Canon's existing lineup for years. Which begs me to believe Canon is deliberately differentiating their Cinema line from their DSLRs. Their DSLR provide barebones video features, but you gotta hand over your life savings to step up to their Cinema line in order to play with the big boys and have all the cool tools. Meanwhile, Sony and Panasonic have made the transition into more advanced cinematography more affordable to the masses. That's why so many aspiring film makers have jumped off Canon's ship and moved on to other brands.


----------



## Johnnie (May 16, 2015)

Tugela said:


> Cinema5D are not the most objective reviewers around, but they do like Canon, so if they are being critical it is pretty telling.



Hi Tugela. Johnnie from cinema5D here. 

Thank you for taking the time watching the review and commenting. 

Will appreciate if you link me to any of my "non objective reviews". 
We work hard to serve the community with what we believe is an objective reviews based on our professional knowledge and experience!

Thank you again!

Johnnie


----------



## LetTheRightLensIn (May 17, 2015)

Tinky said:


> BM announce lots of things. They announced the BMD4K whilst most pre-orders were still waiting for their BMD2.5K's. They announced their URSA mini before most folk have seen an URSA in the wild.



true, it does appear like they have it together better this time though



> Add a battery adaptor. Add a battery system. Add a charger. Add a lens.
> Suddenly that 20% is more like 100% to get something that works.



Not for a Canon user, since a lot of it takes Canon batteries and we already have all the lenses.




> I agree with Canon that things like focus peaking are high end. Most folk want to use AF, where focus peaking has no relevance. Professionals will want MF and will appreciate focus peaking, and will pay to have it.



Oh please. And don't forget that that almost none of their video camera even have any workable AF either!
So it's kinda critical no? Other brands have no stuck it in lowest end stuff. And Canon acts like it's some $25,000+ feature. Jeez.






> But I can understand why they wouldn't. To use magic lantern properly you would probably want twice the buttons.... it really would screw up the carefully evolved stills form factor.



nope




> I've never ever considered the 1DC a serious video camera. Its a DSLR max. And suffers from the very same caveats and compromises that a 550D suffers from. If I was spending that kind of money on a video camera, that would be bottom of my list... fixed grip, (try balancing that with a xlr interface and 70-200 f2.8) fixed LCD etc. The 1DC is for photojournalists doing a bit of video. It's not a film making tool.



$12,000 for a journalist camera when papers are almost all dried up and even S.I. can't even pay to have their own staff anymore?

The new mini URSA has XLR connectors for audio.

(I do agree that XLR might add too much for their DSLR form factors though, that might annoy more than it gets praise over all. So I'm fine with having to get an adapter to plug XLR into an external amp into the DLSR.)




> I can't see any reason for a rebel to have focus peaking out the box.



that's the kind of thinking that makes leaders into followers into has beens
and even if not, it's MBA-think, not scientist, engineer or artist think


----------



## pwp (May 17, 2015)

Sigh...I was looking forward to this cam too. I'd say my way cheaper Panasonic GH4 outperforms it on just about every parameter. No wonder the GH4's and Sony A7s's are pulling indie video shooters away from Canon at an alarming rate. The XC10 really needed to be a category killer. Never mind.

-pw


----------



## Tinky (May 17, 2015)

Hi lettherightlensin

Let me pick up on a couple of points you critique...

Comparable cost.. from the same starting point.. what BMD takes canon batteries out of the box sorry? 

Workable AF... I wouldn't know. I never use AF for video. I was speaking about all these photographers who think 'how hard can video be, I think i'll call myself a dop this week, oh, MF?'

ML interface... the intervalometer on the M is absolute pain, the audio on the 60d an absolute pain. 

Journalist camera... where did I say print journalist? What newspapers have video in their printed copy? C'mon man.

XLR audio adaptors.. my tascam dr-60d does a good job, and crucially gives me a duplicate recording (with dual mono audio at different levels, very useful) but... its an extra box to carry, assemble, connect (connects can go wrong, so fewer the better) hit record on, forget to hit SLATE on (rather than say one integrated file) and carry a half kilo of AA's around with you... I use them, and the tascam is better than the beachteks I used to use.. but still a right royal pain the ash, give me designed in pro audio anyday.

Focus peaking as standard... ok, let canon add it. Happy now? Great for those slow aperture kit lenses with the tiny quarter turn undeamprned focus ring that you need tweasers to grasp. I suppose much like ECF and A-DEP, folk don't actually ave to use it, so, yeah, put it in.


----------



## pedro (May 17, 2015)

So bring on the 5Dc and I'll buy one for astro and low light stills ;-)


----------



## KrisK (May 17, 2015)

Tinky said:


> ...what BMD takes canon batteries out of the box sorry?



I'm not LetTheRightLensIn, but:

Micro Cinema (HD) $995:
https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagicmicrocinemacamera

Micro Studio (4K, camera head) $1295:
https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagicmicrostudiocamera4k

Video Assist HD Recorder (Will scale 4K to HD) $495:
https://www.blackmagicdesign.com/products/blackmagicvideoassist


----------



## Tinky (May 17, 2015)

cheers for that, so the first two aren't field cameras and the last isn't a camera? so not dire t comparisons then...


----------



## Tugela (May 18, 2015)

Johnnie said:


> Tugela said:
> 
> 
> > Cinema5D are not the most objective reviewers around, but they do like Canon, so if they are being critical it is pretty telling.
> ...



Well, since you insist.

Read the review of the 7DII here http://www.cinema5d.com/exclusive-canon-7d-mii-beta-quality-review-footage/. This is not an ideal camera for video, and there is no way it can be commended. I don't own the camera, but have owned Canon DSLRs and camcorders in the past, so I have a reasonable idea of what the 7DII can do based on its specs and online samples. Whatever the merits of the 7D2 are as a still camera, and they are many, as a video camera it is markedly dated.

On the other hand look at the review of the NX1 here http://www.cinema5d.com/lab-review-samsung-nx1-video-mode-frustrating/. I happen to own this camera, and while it is not perfect it is better than any other hybrid out there, and is probably the current reference mark that newer hybrid products should be compared against. But you wouldn't think so reading Sebastian Wöber's comments. His conclusion is that "I would not recommend it for video shooting". Really??? That flies in the face of most every other review out there, and is contrary to the experience of just about everyone who shoots with the camera. I don't know what his problem is, but he is way off the mark for no apparent good reason. Reading his review I seriously wondered if he had the same camera as me, or even had the camera at all.

That is what I mean about "not the most objective reviewers around". Your reviews speak for themselves. If your site is going to post stuff that is completely out of whack like that, don't be surprised if readers take your opinions with a large pinch of salt.


----------



## Johnnie (May 18, 2015)

Hi Tugela

Regarding the Canon 7D mII. I'm surprised you are commenting about a camera you never touched or filmed with. It is a decent camera producing a decent looking video. No more and no less. 

Regarding the NX1. Based on our review (and feedback gathered from other users), Samsung addressed some of the issues we found. The camera is now better then the time we've tested it. Mind you that what Sebastian did was a LAB review and not an actual "visual review" (like the one I did with the Canon 7D mII). Amazing as it might sound, with some cameras "LAB numbers" and "footage look" show different stories. (The NX1 is a perfect example of it). 

Anyway. I'm not here to "change your mind" or "defend" my reviews. All I can say, we are doing our best to serve the community with early footage and decent opinion based on our knowledge and experience as working professionals. Some will appreciate it, while others like you will take the freedom to question our credibility and treat it with a "large pinch of salt". 

BTW, if you have any footage taken with your NX1, you are welcome to share it in our VIDEOLOG. 
People always appreciate seeing good looking footage done with what ever camera!.

Thank you!

Johnnie


----------



## RayValdez360 (May 18, 2015)

Cat fight LOL. Anyway Cinema 5D. Let me buy that that c300 MKII used after you review it.



Johnnie said:


> Hi Tugela
> 
> Regarding the Canon 7D mII. I'm surprised you are commenting about a camera you never touched or filmed with. It is a decent camera producing a decent looking video. No more and no less.
> 
> ...


----------



## Tugela (May 19, 2015)

Johnnie said:


> Hi Tugela
> 
> Regarding the Canon 7D mII. I'm surprised you are commenting about a camera you never touched or filmed with. It is a decent camera producing a decent looking video. No more and no less.
> 
> ...



As I said, not the most objective reviewers around. I am glad that you agree.


----------



## Johnnie (May 19, 2015)

Tugela

You have a strange way of interpreting answers....No wonder we look "not the most objective" to you....


----------



## Tugela (May 20, 2015)

Johnnie said:


> Tugela
> 
> You have a strange way of interpreting answers....No wonder we look "not the most objective" to you....




Your reviews speak for themselves dude. What more can I say? IMO you don't get it and are not interested in admitting that perhaps your site may have dropped the ball on a few occasions, for reasons best known to yourself. The rest of us can only guess your motivations but it is not that important since the pinch of salt has been cast and is now history.

And it is not just me by the way, most people who have used the NX1 think your associate's review was way off base. The general consensus is that among enthusiast ILCs for video the GH4/NX1 share top spot, with the A7s close. Those are followed by Nikon and only then by Canon. If someone buys an enthusiast ILC with an eye to shooting video, they are probably not going to choose a Canon if they are well informed. What is generally considered 5th best in the class shouldn't be getting a kindly review while the best gets panned. Is that objectivity at work?


----------



## Johnnie (May 20, 2015)

Getting fun and funny....I like keyboard heroes.

Enjoy your NX1. Share some footage when you have the time....


----------



## andrewflo (May 21, 2015)

LOALTD said:


> Phenix205 said:
> 
> 
> > Canon's flop may actually benefit the consumers if the price drops significantly, just like the EOS-M, which was way overpriced initially but ended up as a great compact and CHEAP APS-C camera.
> ...



Haha this is a great silver lining


----------



## linus (May 23, 2015)

It's nice to see a dedicated 4k camcorder from Canon (as in one of with a mp count closer to its resolution capability, in a sort-of-camcorder form factor, and less pricey than the EOS Cinema cameras) and really there's hardly a glut of 4k camcorders with sensors this large (in dimensions, I mean) at a reasonable price point.

But still: my impression is that action shooters might want a more rugged build quality and enthusiasts and student videographers might want an interchangeable lens camera.

I personally would have liked to have seen an ef-m mount camcorder (with a 4 or 8mp sensor) at roughly that price point. Clearly it wouldn't have all the pro level features of a C100+ (a super 35 sensor, recording to 4:2:2 or uncompressed codecs without an external recorder, xlr inputs, etc) but it would help to promote the ef-m mount (why use a reflex mount when you have a mirrorless one?) and probably have better image processing than the Blackmagic Cinema Camera (which looks considerably more attractive in that general price range).


----------



## StenR (May 25, 2015)

I would buy it for the low-light abilities,and the all-in-one approach of course. I don't mind having a non-constant aperture zoom as I don't zoom when recording, but a dedicated ISO wheel would have been good.

There's a impressive demo film up on Vimeo with all its gimbal shots made with the XC10:
https://vimeo.com/127149178


----------



## Tinky (May 26, 2015)

StenR said:


> I don't mind having a non-constant aperture zoom as I don't zoom when recording



I don't zoom either during a record, unless I'm using a camera with a mechanical rampable servo zoom (such as an ENG) but I do have a trio of f2.8s which is my go to shooting kit, covering 11mm-200mm on my aps-c cameras.

The trouble with f-drop is not just zooming, but shot matching. 

If you start off wide and at say f2.8, then zoom a bit, zoom a bit more, your shutter really should be constant, your aperture cannot because of f-drop, so your iso has to change. Maybe not so big a deal skipping between iso100 and iso 400 to compensate in good light... not so good when skipping between iso800 and iso3200 in lower light... I'm in the habit of keeping iso/gain constant within a scene, and generally as low as possible.


----------



## meywd (May 26, 2015)

I am no videograpgher but this looks good https://vimeo.com/canonpro/battleoftheages


----------



## AlexB (Jun 5, 2015)

I really want to like this camera, it does have it's pro's. But it also has, in my opinion, some unnecessary con's.

- I can live with an integrated lens. And even I'm not thrilled about it, I can probably learn to live with it being a full two stop difference at the wide and tele end.
- I like that they put an ND filter in it. Anyone know what strength it is?
- Don't like the negative comments about the viewfinder loupe not being any good. Kinda crossing my fingers that those were pre-production models and that it has been improved.
- Also don't like the comments about lack of external controls and assignable buttons. 
- From the looks of it, they don't include a charger for the battery. Really Canon? Not that I don't already have one but still...
- The US site list an included 64GB CFast card and a card reader. The Norwegian site don't. I just emailed them asking if they include it or not. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't. CFast is REALLY expensive in Norway. A 128GB Lexar 3400x CFast 2.0 card in the US cost $314.99 from B&H, which is already a bit much for 128GB of storage. But hold onto your hats. The lowest price I have found in Norway is equal to US$941.61!

So this is where I don't really understand it. Canon say it's for professionals, but they hesitate to include features that professionals expect to find in such a camera. Then they say it's for consumers, but the media cost is sky high. I don't know any consumer that would buy a camera and pay the same price again for two memory cards.

So, that's my little rant about this camera. Just because I really want to like it. 

_**EDIT*: Canon Norway replied to me. CFast card and card reader is *NOT* included for us. ???
**EDIT 2:* There is one dealer that is offering a package deal with a 128GB CFast 2.0 card + card reader (brands not stated) at a price point equal to what it is selling for in the US. So yay I guess._


----------



## KrisK (Jun 7, 2015)

For all the talk of 4K, I'd really like to know how the native HD footage looks versus something like the A7S or GH4. How well does it handle internal downsampling for HD 60p? 

The camera's slated to ship in 3 weeks, and I've yet to see any side-by-side footage.


----------



## Ebrahim Saadawi (Jun 7, 2015)

Canon claims they use the same C100/300 downscaling technique (which is very clever (no debayering) and results in perfect 1080p from 4K sensor)

Let's hope it is.


----------



## camaracompacta (Jun 25, 2015)

I don't need 4K just yet but its amazing! http://365enfoques.com/analisis/flash-para-canon-recomendado/ flash para canon


----------



## crazyrunner33 (Jun 26, 2015)

I'm trying to hard to understand and like this camera, but I can't see any reason to buy this camera over the RX10. The RX10 outperforms the XC10 in almost every aspect and at a fraction of the price. The RX10 has a constant 2.8 lens vs the XC10's variable 2.8-5.6 lens. The RX10 is much smaller and better for drone work, it has better slow motion in 1080 and options for up to 960 fps and can capture 20MP RAW stills with bursts up to 14 fps. 

The $1300 RX10 camera is clearly superior to the $2500 dollar XC10. To me, the XC10 is only worth 500-800 dollars. Even at that price, I still wouldn't buy it. I keep hoping that Canon would step up and compete, but I'm losing hope.


----------



## RLPhoto (Jun 26, 2015)

This camera should embarrass canon. Its 2,499$, does nothing more than the 649$ PZ1000 cam, costs as much as the A7s and almost the price of the A7rII, and has a fixed lens. I'd like to see this at 499$ where it belongs.


----------



## KrisK (Jun 26, 2015)

More YouTube footage. Not mine. High ISO samples starting at 2:25.

Not sure if anything meaningful can be gleaned, given it's, well, YouTube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-M84vVDx4mU


----------



## ajfotofilmagem (Jun 26, 2015)

RLPhoto said:


> This camera should embarrass canon. Its 2,499$, does nothing more than the 649$ PZ1000 cam, costs as much as the A7s and almost the price of the A7rII, and has a fixed lens. I'd like to see this at 499$ where it belongs.


Yes, Canon XC10 is quite expensive, but we should not be simplistic to compare it to Panasonic FZ1000.

Canon XC10 records 4K with very high bitrate 305MB/S MPEG4, while Panasonic has FZ1000 bitrate is only 100MB/s

I believe XC10 is designed to record *AND EDIT* video 4K while maintaining decent quality while the cameras below $ 1000 will show significant quality losses during the editing 4K.


----------



## Tugela (Jul 1, 2015)

KrisK said:


> More YouTube footage. Not mine. High ISO samples starting at 2:25.
> 
> Not sure if anything meaningful can be gleaned, given it's, well, YouTube.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-M84vVDx4mU



The issue isn't YouTube, it appears to be the camera, or at least the edited material. The outdoor shots look unacceptably soft compared to 4K from other cameras. In fact, it looks worse than even HD from a decent modern camera, so I don't know. 

There is a distressing amount of purple fringing going on around the backlit trees. That is what I hated about my G30, and it seems the XC10 has the same problem.


----------

