Four entries so far (two advertorials, an "intro" piece, and now an interview) about this cam.
We get it. The world absolutely must take notice of this cam.
OK, noted. Thanks.
I'd like to see this with the 70-200 f/2.8 (ABC) version.
rallyfan: Why harass the three elderly women in Spain?
I've worn one briefly, in a past life.
Hi, b craw!
Ωραία σύνθεση και φωτισμός!
You're sidestepping the issue.
The entire "North Korea" rant... Non sequitur, I'm not going further there.
The issue isn't what I think, and it's certainly not your grandiose self-entitled "free world" nonsense.
The issue is what those three ladies thought.
I don't care whether that matters to you or not. Your rights end where the rights of another begin.
Wearing a beret and being an "artiste" won't change that. Neither will strawman arguments about totalitarian regimes and illogical rants about small freedoms mattering.
Of course small freedoms matter. You don't seem to respect those freedoms though. Not when it comes to the three ladies in question. Oh, no. Your "art" matters more than their feelings or freedoms.
Again, in many nations you can behave as poorly as this and it's legal. Congrats. Civics can be taught, even to "street photographers" I'm sure.I question whether civility can be taught to them though.
Good night, all.
Miron I liked your images 114, 127, 129, 133, 145, 148 and I've not looked at them all even. Thanks.
If the photo is staged, that's another story. If it's not, well frankly a grown man should have known better.
Saying "well it's art, we're fine artists" is a load.
Saying "oh, our rights are at stake" is also a load.
Saying "the image touches the viewer's emotions" is not a justification for the behaviour.
His "art" doesn't mean he can be a yob to three elderly women on the street. Those are human beings, those are someone's loved ones.
For the record I thoroughly enjoyed images 9, 7; this one though I certainly did not.
monsieurlumiere: For young videographer who study the basics, most of the equipment used are Canon 5D mk3 cameras and lenses. The cost of such equipment is more expensive than the XC-10. The future of the XC-10 will tell us if this equipment is good for videography students. If the XC-10 works well, It could be that it becomes the videography standard for students, as the 5D was.
I feel this is a very good point. I'd not thought of that. Thanks.
Come off it, T3; it's not a human rights crusade, it's simply rude behaviour.
In many places, it's legal. I can think of no place where it's right.
May your elderly relatives "probably just go on with their lives" too then.
These are senior citizens that -- unless the photo is staged -- are clearly being made uncomfortable. What you or I or the photographer thinks isn't important in this case.
In areas where this sort of thing is legal, well, it's legal. It's not polite or considerate though.
munro harrap: Dpreview started THREE threads:
Opinion: Why the Canon XC-10 is a Big DealThe Canon XC-10: What You Need to KnowandCanon XC-10 digital camcorder brings 4k video and stills together.
As with other cameras, announcing anything other than the machine and its complete listed specifications prior to a complete review (nudge, nudge, wink, wink, say no more....there are these days fewer and fewer of these, nudge, nudge)
really is asking for trouble. Involving staff in replying in defence of a machine they are utterly ignorant of is extremely rash.
Everybody gets upset, and then the cranks, trolls and troublemakers all join in, instead of writing out 1000 times, "I must not pretend to know things I am ignorant about".
There are an awful lot of just plain bad, timewasting people on this site, and I would suggest Dpreview trawl through all of the posts and permanently block those they deem enter into this category forthwith, me included , if they feel like it.
I don't think it's asking for trouble. It's asking for clicks. They got plenty. Therefore, they succeeded.
If people were banned for making disagreeable comments, they'd comment somewhere else, and then that site would get the traffic.
Traffic uber alles.
Why harass the three elderly women in Spain?
My only reservation has nothing to do with lens selection, as I don't care at all about shallow DOF.
It has to do with Samsung customer service.
The Canon reps have always been relatively responsive. Also the Oly people.
The camera itself seems absolutely great; finally something that can track moving objects in real life.
ProstheticEmpathy: I see a lot of 'not the target audience' comments, but I don't feel like I've had a clear explanation of who the target audience actually is.
People that like the product and agree with the editorial are the target audience. They are also generally not commenting because they are working professionals and generally an order of magnitude better than anyone else. This is the revolutionary convergence product that they will use to go back to the 1960s via time travel and get both stills and conclusive video of the Kennedy assassination.
People that don't like the product and don't agree with the article should consider the possibility that they are unemployed for good reason, clueless, and a troll. Not only are they not the target audience, but they really aren't good videographers either.
Or something along those lines.
Truth be told, I can use a camera that's well built, can capture video and stills, will withstand a reasonable amount of humidity in the atmosphere, has excellent high ISO performance, will integrate into a WiFi network for file transfers, and will operate from a plugged-in power supply.
In fact I could use two. They'd be in fixed installations and operate at temps up to 35C and I'd use them to track moving objects, working with maybe as low as 100 lux.
I get the impression I'm not the target audience here either though. If it's not the tech, it's certainly the price.
mpgxsvcd: One simple question to Dpreview. With hindsight at your disposal would you still have produced this opinion piece or would you just have left it at the press release and moved on? Basically, was it worth the effort to produce this article in your opinion?
There's a saying, I believe it's Iberian but I also believe it applies globally: "Where there are two people there will be three opinions" or something to that effect. Very wise.
tkbslc: Well I didn't agree with this article, but either way 690 comments and counting means it was a win for the author and the site. Lots of traffic for sure.
The article itself is a success and in fact it may serve the site better to post articles like this rather than articles that seem more logical to the more vocal readers. Clicks are clicks and they must translate to funding at some point; otherwise, nobody would care about clicks.
I suspect even the camera will be a success, for the reasons I stated earlier: I don't think sales will go to individuals but rather to multi-unit orders (for fixed installations and/or field work among employees, for example) and Canon is a "safe" buy.
Since Canon is "safe" the camera will sell.
The innovations listed in the article were generally true innovations; however, they've generally been introduced elsewhere previously, in other cameras or devices -- including by... Canon.
Do I hate Canon or any other camera maker? No.
Is the site is independent? No. We're talking about legal relationships among entities. A owns B.
Is the article written in good faith? Yes.
Is the article correct? No.
Donnie G: Canon creates another tool for working pros that, once again, sends armchair hobbyists stomping about madly and foaming at the mouth with rage and resentment because the product wasn't designed for them and isn't priced for them either. Boohoo! How dare Canon put pros before trolls! Let's teach Canon a lesson by running out right now and buying all the A7s, A6000s, FZ1000s, and GH4s we can find, then put our Canon lenses on them. I bet that'll show Canon who's boss. :))
Fantastic video, thanks for that! Very cheerful!
So the target audience does agree with the article?
Is the target audience commenting?