And on April 30, Canon tweeted:"#ThrowbackThursday to 1997 when the Optura was released, allowing users to capture video & digital photos in one unit."
So is the XC10 an innovative hybrid camera?Not by a long shot.
But at least Canon holds on to their designers for a long time, because the Optura and the XC10 looks liek they were designed by the same guy.
But they certainly look similar. :)
IEBA1: What the hell is it with DPreview and this stupid camera?First we get the powder puff piece of why it's a "big deal" and "leading the convergence." Then we get this.
As a writer for over a decade, I'd like to see this author ask one followup question to clarify the double-marketing speak that contradicts itself:
"The XC10 has a 5-axis stabilization system when recording HD video. That’s … optical stabilization with digital stabilization. With digital stabilization you [crop the sensor]. You don’t lose image stabilization when shooting still images or 4K video. … since you’re using the entire sensor to capture an image or video, the camera reverts to normal optical stabilization."
So then there's no "5-axis" stabilization in 4K or stills. If not, then don't promote it.
"The XC10 uses the same codec as the C300 Mark II. It’s called XF-AVC. It is a proprietary Canon codec in an MXF wrapper, but it is H.264 based, so it is standards based."
It's proprietary - it's standards based.
Barney, you funny.Coincidentially, Canon tweeted this:"@CanonUSAimaging: #ThrowbackThursday to 1997 when the Optura was released, allowing users to capture video & digital photos in one unit http://twitter.com/CanonUSAimaging/status/593807541362130945/photo/1"
So when you say this one is innovative, remember, it's not.
Not by a long shot.
I urge DPreview readers to check out the coverage of Samsung's NX1 because that camera deserves all the "innovative" and "integrated" and "game changing" press lauded to it.
I like Canon. I really do. I've reviewed their gear for years and lauded the features and capabilities they've brought to market.
But more so than the oddness of the XC10, I'm bothered by this blatant overly positive coverage of this one camera that is late to the game and is under featured, and overpriced, compared to the direct competition of hybrid DSLRs with internal 4K recording.
What the hell is it with DPreview and this stupid camera?First we get the powder puff piece of why it's a "big deal" and "leading the convergence." Then we get this.
I had hoped to see a comparison of the Note's video with and withought HDR. And does HDR video work in 4K?
IEBA1: I agree with all the posts that wonder about the point of this article. Given how few "opinion" pieces are on DPreview, why the XC10 gets a positive opinion piece makes the whole web site suspect.
I laughed out loud at: "The XC10 represents an important step on the path to convergence between the still and video imaging worlds, though it’s important to recognize that it’s an early step."
Wha? Can you even find a camera any more that doesn't do both?
Years ago, I hacked a GH2 for fantastic video, stills, and augmented it to use cine servo zoom lenses for capabilities still lenses simply cannot provide. Last year I upgraded to a GH4 and haven't looked back. It is a stellar tool. You can see gobs of my technical videos here:
The only unique feature is the rotatable grip. Something I had on my first HD camcorder, the JVC GR-HD1. Yes, I'm an early adopter. Thats why it bugs me when I see article like this that are _years_ behind the curve.
And worst of all, after reading this Canon puff piece,I see Dale was also involved with simultaneously writing the Samsung NX1 review where it concludes:
"And here's the crazy thing… Almost every feature on the camera seems aimed directly at a class leading competitor… The result is a camera loaded with features for both still photography and video, and which excels at both."
"We could probably justify giving the NX1 an award simply based on technological advancements and raising the bar for both image quality and video performance in its class. But those achievements are wrapped inside a well designed camera with a great user experience… In the process… it pushes boundaries and drives innovation across the entire market. Congratulations to the Samsung NX1 for winning our Gold Award."
So I don't understand this praise of the Canon camera while writing those words about the Samsung NX1. The NX1 is an important step in convergence, that has long been going on.
I find it interesting that Dale has high praise for the Canon here "for the intended market" he insists. But no camera like this is restricted in any way for any market. It's a camera purchasable and usable by anyone.
I think those camcorders which now have TCP/IP technology in them and the ability to connect a 4G LTE USB stick and stream directly from the camera are FAR more targeted at the ENG news market than this little Canon cam, which seems to offer zero "target market" specific features.
News shooters I know don't want a 300 Mbps data stream because it just takes longer to do everything. The guys I know (one who just had a Dallas video he produced picked up by ABC, and then the BBC, shoots low bitrate MPEG so he can access and puph the file from the camera, through his cell phone to the station.
In news, speed is everything. This Canon camera lacks that.XLR jacks for wireless and handheld reporter mics? Nope. Ability to power an on-camera light? Nope.
Lab D: This camera may be a total FAIL. It depends how good the 1 inch sensor is. If it is similar to current 1 inch sensors, then the F/5.6 zoom will render the video near useless indoors (at least towards the long end).The 12 MP jpeg only stills combined with an F/5.6 might yield lower quality images than most P&S cameras with F/2 lenses.
So the camera becomes a limited use camera/camcorder for $2500.
Any like someone else mentioned, what does this camera use to track moving subjects? Please don't say CDAF only. :)
THen you haven't been on a news shoot recently. I see all kinds of camera being used. From handycams, to cell phones, to those 2/3" ENG cameras you mention, to new cameras with direct IP addressability and a place to plug a 4G LTE USB stick for streaming from the camera, to large sensor cameras and DSRS. It's been blown wide open for some time.
zakk9: It's difficult to understand why I would prefer this over a GH4. The list of features where the Panasonic is superior would be longer than the 818 characters I have left in ths post.
The card requirements are a particular curiosity because I expect most U-3 SD cards (30 MBps minimum) to be able to handle the 305 Mbps rate which is 38 MBps.
The GH4 I own shoots 4K _up to_ 100 Mbps. It typically uses 80 Mbps because, well, the point of having a big sensor video is to get some shallow DoF in the shot, so all that blurry area compresses very well. 80 Mbps is 10 MBps which is a pittance, really. I don't have any U-3 cards and I've shot 4K for about a year now with zero issues.
Dale responded to a comment: "Also, don't interpret our enthusiasm for the *concept* of what this product represents with the actual product."
This product represents something that's been in place for nearly five years now. I'm glad he's enthusiastic for the *concept* because it's a *reality* that I've been professionally writing about for several years.
I agree with all the posts that wonder about the point of this article. Given how few "opinion" pieces are on DPreview, why the XC10 gets a positive opinion piece makes the whole web site suspect.
Panny has proved that bit rate isn't everything- by offering a 200 Mbps HD and a 100 Mbps 4K in one camera, and the Panny's 4K soundly trounces the HD with up to 2x the bit rate available. So more bits ≠ better image automatically.
The market for a GOOD high end compact is certainly there. Plenty of cameras are being sold to this market, each with different strengths. I'm glad to see this discussion and I hope the market continues to evolve these cameras.
Personally, I'd like to see some love paid to the high end compact travel zoom- something with a 10x or greater, but with a lot of attention paid to the lens and sensor. I'm okay with a larger lens (and so are many others as this high end compact camera market segment proves) so having similarly great photos with a longer zoom range.
Oh, and the flash needs to be internal because, no matter how low the aperture, there are still times when you HAVE to have a flash.
I moderate the GH4 User Group on Facebook and we have been looking forward to a profile dynamic range test like DPReview published for the GH2.
Unfortunately, this entire dynamic range page is only about iDynamic- which we have found creates a speckled blue noise in the image, especially in 4K, and we don't use it.
It would be far more useful to see how CineD compared to CineV, Standard, Natural, etc. And when you say, "You should choose CineLikeD for heavier grading and colour work on the GH4 ... The upside is that dynamic range is actually still very good and comparable to the dynamic range offered by raw video on the 5D Mark III..." you should SHOW thy dynamic range tests to back that up.
As 4K is the key factor for the GH4. Can we see dynamic range tests in video mode, just to see if the DR tests in still mode apply to video.
The compression engines for video and stills are different and the GH series has always suffered when it came to retaining dark detail (separation of those steps) in HD. It does considerably better in 4K meaning that within the video side itself, the camera offers different results, let alone the difference between stills and video.
So a test of still capability may not apply at all to what the camera does in 4K video. Dynamic range tests for video please!
Kwick1: Absolutely hate this "comparative review" format. If you want to have a set of common pages for video in each in-depth review, then fine, but the rest of the camera feature sets are apples and oranges.
Could you please break them apart?
I like the comparison as these two cameras are being discussed hand in hand in the forums I manage.
mrcultureshock: I really dislike this combo review. The review for the Sony A6000 is 13 pages long and yet the combo review for GH4 and A7s, which are 2 of the most important hybrid camera releases ever, only gets 14 pages?
Please review the GH4 and the A7s separately.
Please rent a Blackmagic Design HDMI to SDI Ultra HD converter and HyperDeck Studio Pro to record the A7s' 4K output for an accurate 4K to 4K comparison. Even a few hours of tests can answer a bazillion reader questions. Mine included. :)