rallyfan: Why harass the three elderly women in Spain?
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?
Jon H Laake: I bought a leather case for my rx100 mk I from China. It provides all the grip you'll ever need for a dimunitive camera like this. About 10 USD on eBay.
Those cases look nice! I was looking at those. Did it arrive quickly?
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.
Yes, exactly: the market muscle to sell institutions a high priced but under-featured camera that can't match the GH4. Thinking about that statement, I believe you're correct. They do have that power and they will probably succeed.
I don't think the camera has to have different features. I think companies will buy this in sets of 2 or more rather than individuals.
mpgxsvcd: I understand the argument that someone shooting ENG could want 4:2:2 and extremely high bit rates to satisfy a broadcast station requirement. However, what are they doing now if that requirement exists today? Have you ever had ENG footage rejected because it wasn’t 4:2:2? No cameras in this price range shoot 4K 4:2:2 internally right now. So does that mean that 4K is not used at all for ENG shooting?
In reality I am not sure that ENG shooters are even ready for 4K. It would be nearly impossible to transfer native 4K files with these high bit rates from the field. They would certainly have to transcode it down to heavily compressed 1080p at the very least. Then the benefit of high bit rate 4K would be lost.
Also the viewfinder is essential for outdoor field work like this. With the large viewfinder in place this camera is not small anymore. In addition the viewfinder appears to be attached to the LCD screen. That really does not look to be very durable at all.
No. In fairness the pivoting body and pivoting LCD accomplish two different things. Consider this: instead of looking at the former as a pivoting body, flip roles and look at is as a pivoting grip. Then the ergonomics become apparent. So the pivoting body is useful. The pivoting LCD is also useful.
It could very well be that few people will buy a single copy of this device, but many organisations will buy 10 or 20 copies. I think Canon may be to video equipment what IBM used to be to computer equipment: Nobody ever got fired buying IBM, the saying went, and so maybe today nobody ever got fired buying Canon. They're "safe" for the guy signing the purchase order.
Whether the product is innovative may not actually matter as much as the label. Canon may use the tech seen here, in an evolved form, in future cams or camcorders or whatever -- including suppositories... What matters is they may be filling a line item on any number of purchase orders etc.
Meanwhile, DPR killed several birds with one stone by running several pieces on the device: the anticipated responses to the claims here generated site traffic; Canonisti arrived to defend the indefensible, somebody at Amazon might be happily counting clicks, and in the final analysis, there's no such thing as bad publicity.