Could this find a market as an entry-level pro webcam? The browser interface is actually a good choice IMO. Sound could be an issue with no XLRs but I suppose unbalanced lines could work.
Donnie G: It's wonderful to see the trolls whipped up into a feeding frenzy over Canon's XC10 multi-media camera, especially since, on this site, that usually means that Canon has hit another grand slam home run out of the marketplace ballpark. Canon's fresh approach to camera design ergonomics, distilled from their Cinema EOS cameras, is a very clear indication of the form any mirrorless EOS DSLR replacement will take in the future. Imagine a mirrorless EOS Rebel with no need of a battery draining EVF and no need for a mirror box to support an OVF because it would have a simple removable eye loupe that attaches directly to the live view display. You would control the sensor display from the grip via a joystick when the loupe is attached. Ah, but first things first. :))
A mirrorless EOS Rebel with no EVF or mirror box to support an OVF, but rather a loupe attaching to a live view display is a compelling idea. I'd like that.
The XC10 is unremarkable.
shutterbobby: Funny I had the MV1..the 1st digital video & still cam from Canon about 20 yrs ago,at the same price as this one.DV quality video & stills good enough for web work back then..made money with this as well.Sure there is a market for this....
The MV1s were nice machines and they had that BP-9something charger if memory serves, and our cables would always twist and strip... Sure, users made money using those, but now things are different. I used the last one in a fixed location; reliable and worth the money back then.
Quality today is somehow vital and irrelevant at the same time We all want better tones, better dynamics, an end to rolling shutter issues, etc. OTOH some guy with an iPhone 6P has uploaded a video before the fancy gear is even unpacked.
The best part of the advertorial was the bit about "Even DPReview would benefit from this type of camera." Well, yes, if it sells via the site I suppose DPReview will benefit. Congrats.
Other than that though... Meh... Calling this some sort of revolution is unfounded, and the primary reason the author has to list for whom this device is intended is that it is ostensibly unclear for whom this device in intended...
Will Jackie Treehorn buy 20-30 cameras for his company? I doubt it. Skin tones are poor, and low light performance is unremarkable.
We've shot Canon since the first EOS 6x0 series. The following decade we got the Kodak/Canon hybrids. Then actual Canon DSLRs, and so on, and I'm sure many here have similar backgrounds. If Canon thought this device would be exciting, they've lost the plot.
Nos 4, 1, 2 my top three pics, in that order. Great shots.
rallyfan: I think the pricing is actually bad news for J fans and Nikon 1 fans.
In the past, the 1s were priced a bit high IMO and they didn't seem to sell very well. Maybe I'm mistaken but that's the impression I got. Then, 1s would show up at deep discounts and there were bargains to be had.
As a result I learned that this is a nice system. It's very small and has great burst/AF performance compared to other small MILCs, and with the deep discounts previously available it was very compelling.
The new J seems nice. Granted, the 4K/15fps thing seems silly at first (upon closer examination, it's borderline idiotic, but oh, well -- the other features are great). However the new cam is priced well from the start, and may sell better, meaning there may not be deep discounts.
I hope it flops and is sold off in fire sales, because I think this is a great camera! I can get by with a single battery and sell the lens anyway.
Now I wonder what their next move might be. A V series 1 along similar lines but with the viewfinder differences implemented would also be very interesting.
These are great cams overall!
I think the pricing is actually bad news for J fans and Nikon 1 fans.
electrophoto: I used to own the X10 - and quite liked it... always felt, that at the time it came out it was one of the best compacts on the market - a striking balance between size, external controls and good enough IQ - but times have changed and there's not really anything that tempts me with the X30.When I need a compact I take my LX100 - which is only slightly larger than the X30 - and neither is truly pocketable so it's less off an issue anyhow.The LX100 does everything the X30 does including a decent EVF but with a much larger sensor, nicer lens (at least for my needs) and a good bit of traditional / external controls. And the price isn't that far off either.
Or if I wanted it even more compact the RX100Mk3 is a tempting offer too...
If fuji would have at least put in a 1" sensor.
electrophoto, I suppose you're right. A better sensor (larger? better? both?) would make the existing price more palatable. I also agree that doing so might make people think twice about moving up the Fuji range.
rallyfan: I suspect a used X10 would be a more reasonable proposal given the high pricing of this, and the modest IQ.
As to the layout and controls, we are rapidly approaching the stage when neither will have any sort of context, in that generations of photographers are coming that will have never used "classic" controls and will have never used a film camera.
This is great news, because we'll finally break free of the "film" mentality and move forward. The nostalgia is not just pointless, it's counter-productive at times.
Anybody here work as an X-ray tech, an orthopedic, or a radiologist? Do you miss the days of developing and fixing X-ray film and autorads? Do you wish you could get the "feel" and "control" back today, or would you rather use a modern interface and have your patients get their results instantly, with the possibility of further analyses using a computerized interface? Hm...
Why are photographers still stuck when everyone else that uses imaging isn't? Must be hobbyists.
You're calling me a troll but avoiding the issues I've brought up.
There's not been a direct answer regarding whether you get paid for the process or the image. If you get paid for the image, the process is quite literally your problem, not the client's. Therefore you can use whatever device you prefer anyway. If you prefer using dials, good for you. Some may say they're "established" or "proven" but they've done nothing to move us forward IMO. We need a simple, direct interface, true, but I don't think this is it.
As to the more important question -- whether you wear a beret -- I'm going to take all that above as a "yes."
It's not an inexpensive camera for the image quality offered. If you like it, so be it. I'd want something that makes imaging easier. To each their own. I haven't lost hope in Fujifilm, as I said their range is noteworthy. This isn't their finest example though.
Thanks for the discussion.
It's hard to pic a favourite but I particularly enjoyed no. 7, from Utah, because it took a cold day and brought out a striking warmth.
Are you paid for the process or the image?
Speaking personally, I've paid others for images. Do your clients pay you for the process?
(I just can't resist: Do you wear a beret?...).
I suspect your comment about separating retro styling from tactile utility may have merit. However, I think the best button may be no button, since a display with icons can be made to generate contextual menus etc. This gets back to people hating contextual menus of course.
If contextual menus are the answer to getting us closer to "one tap, and YOU ARE DONE!" then so be it.
The retro styling and characteristics aren't necessarily an issue in and of themselves; however, everything on a camera costs money. For $X, given the choice between retro aesthetics and a larger sensor, or retro aesthetics and better WiFi implementation, etc., I think we could be better served going with those other items.
Why not have one of the retro buttons initiate a sequence of events that would backup the image, send a copy to the client, and let the camera show me a paypal (or other) receipt on the screen? (This would resemble a mobile phone...).
The best camera is... no camera. We're stuck with cameras for the time being if we want images. While we're still stuck with cameras though, why not make them more effective and more direct? To me, "direct" doesn't mean having dials; "direct" means "single action results in backup/image sent/payment received/wham bam thank you, ma'am you're done!"
The closer we get to not even needing a camera to do these things, the better IMO.
I think a similar cam, at a slightly lower price, with the larger sensor would be much more compelling.
"Artiste" is correct. I leave it to you -- since you admit to having leisure time -- to look up the etymology and origins.
There is no answer to my last question. The reason may be that we're wasting time with "retro" cams and not actually moving forward as a result.
To be fair, Fujifilm have released some very significant offerings in the past, and their current range is generally quite good. This one is expensive, and has moderate IQ; however, it's got "retro" looks and is attracting attention as a result.
Would the cam get the same attention if wasn't retro? Is this then a case of form over actual function?
@ b craw: "Your commentary belies the full latitude of options that might be desired in a 'creative' process. And your analogies of other imaging technologies ignores the obviously more narrow imperatives of those contexts."
Those other tech have contexts that aren't narrower; they're absolutely vital. We need more autorads and medical imaging than we need "artistes" wandering around with dials and buttons, generating "fine art" and shooting images of bowls of fruit... Where it matters, where something improtant is actually on the line, we've moved forward and have left "retro" behind for good.
For photography specifically though, here's my question: Why hasn't anyone come up with a way for me to take an image, send one copy to storage, and another copy directly to the office? Right now? In real time?
Where is the camera that lets me to backup, process, send, and get paid with the press of a single icon on a screen? Emphasis: Get paid, now. Dials and "retro" aren't doing this.
I suspect a used X10 would be a more reasonable proposal given the high pricing of this, and the modest IQ.
Any news about whether they are planning a Lytro studio in Kampala?
I'm skeptical about high(ish) ISO and shadow details.
Hopefully the next generation will improve these two issues.
For now it's a very competitive product though. Size is good.
Esign: Fake or not, doesn’t matter att all, as long as the picture is fit for use and reinforces the story. If not, don’t use is, even if it's NOT "fake".
Monkeys are a paraphyletic group for reasons with which I won't bore you. In any case, hominoids (chimps, humans, and so on) are not monkeys, but rather apes.