Re: Canon announces XC10 and new codec XF-AVC
 

For Filmmaking the XC10 is a B camera, but Canon is equally pushing the view that the XC10 is a broadcast compliant portable news camera for reporters operating without a crew. Also for drone use.

Re: Canon announces XC10 and new codec XF-AVC
 

I think this camera has two personalities. On one hand it is a new media camera for the one person crew and on the other a very compact, portable complement to the Canon C series for television production. In the new media role, the camera offers better ergonomics than a smart phone or DSLR, and higher quality results. New media display devices in the home are typically HDTV resolution today and UHD in the future. There is no need for more resolution except for cropping. Companies with websites and HDTV requirements can satisfy them with this camera. The camera body is not designed for use under adverse weather conditions but neither are most DSLRs or prosumer camcorders that they might replace. Broadcasters will still require some traditional heavy duty cameras for traditional production with two person crews.

The technical parameters of the XC10 seem well matched to the new media requirement. The large sensor, in video terms, and relatively small pixel count means larger pixels with more dynamic range and higher sensitivity. Keeping still resolution down to 12 MP allows for more aggressive optical low pass filtering that reduces moire in video images. UHD/4K reads out pixel for pixel and does not require fancy line skipping or other gymnastics that generate image artifacts. HD does require scaling but it is straight forward down conversion. If the lens provides high MTF in the UHD resolution range then the pictures can be very sharp.

Use of the XC10 as a B camera has been discussed in other posts. I think there is room for some optimism about the performance of the lens and sensor based on similarity of technical approach to the C series cameras. The high bit rate intra frame codec should preserve the quality. In the hands of a professional camera operator with due attention to exposure, C-log footage should be suitable for cutting with C series cameras.

At $2,500 a copy, this camera is a bit expensive as a personal camera but not prohibitive for someone used to paying for DSLR bodies and lenses. The camera needs RAW capability for stills. In a future version, an EVF would be attractive provided it has sufficient resolution. It could make a great travel camera for anyone wishing to shoot stills and video.

Many of the comments on this camera have been made about what is isn't rather than what it is. I think it is conceptually different and will be used in ways not yet apparent. DSLR video brought about completely unanticipated changes and this camera may do the same thing.

Re: Canon announces XC10 and new codec XF-AVC
 

Edit: original post removed; contained incorrect computations. I was looking at an alternative to CFast 2.0 by pairing an SSD-based external recorder. I unfortunately overlooked a key feature of the recorder which is its ability to record 4K.

An Odyssey 7Q+ (comes with two 256 GB SSDs) would add about USD 2,300. That's cheaper than four 128 GB CFast 2.0 which comes in around USD 3,200 (Sandisk brand).

But of course the unit is not as portable and the total cost is now too high for my budget. Still, a SSD-based system may be attrictive for some and could reduce overall costs.

Re: Canon announces XC10 and new codec XF-AVC
 

sample video.



No indoor shots so no idea of low light capabilities that could be the downfall of this sensor

Re: Canon announces XC10 and new codec XF-AVC
 

Nice! Really love the look of the footage.

While I earlier dismissed the XC10 as being useful for me, I'm now taking a second look. Still need to find a solution though to bring cost down. Basically, I don't need 4K right now. So if reading specs correctly, I should be able to get 8-bit 50 Mbps 4:2:2 HD in camera on its SDXC card.

Another not-too-expensive option (if HDMI outputs clean 4:2:2 1080p) is to record to Blackmagic's 'Video Assist' unit which uses SDXC.

My thought is that CFast 2.0 cards should come down in price (hopefully!). So perhaps in a couple years, I would then have a good 4K solution.

Thoughts? Anyone else eyeing this as just an HD unit for now?

Edit: 50 Mbps is reserved for 60fps. If shooting 29.97 or 23.976, bit rate caps at 35 Mbps. But that's still acceptable for me. 4:2:2 is must have whereas 50 Mbps "broadcast" bitrate isn't.

Re: Canon announces XC10 and new codec XF-AVC
 

Hmm. I like the ergonomics that mimic the C100.
And this should offer good color and dynamic range.

Lack of XLR, remote control and motorized zoom are limiting its usefulness.
And the dark zoom lens doesn't impress me for indoor shooting.
Don't know if this camera is moire-resistant. Shooting people with patterned dresses or rooms with air-conditioning grills often causes problems with dSLRs.

I like the use of the same batteries as the 6D and the 5D MkIII (I already have some), but I suspect these will not be adequate for longform shots (e.g. concerts of conferences).
I dislike the Cfast 2 price. I think I would prefer a generic low-profice 2.5" SSD instead, like the Blackmagic. I know, this would make the camera larger.

I think I'll pass on it. I hope for a body like the Sony EA50 or the C100 instead.

N.F.

Re: Canon announces XC10 and new codec XF-AVC
 

Yes, that's very true! Also considerably more compact than a 28-300. Plus, the 1" sensor can become an advantage when you're at the tele end.

Incidentally, one thing people used to interchangeable lenses don't always appreciate is how useful having a wide zoom range is.

Re: Canon announces XC10 and new codec XF-AVC
 

In North America, the XC10 is bundled with a 64GB CFast card, which strikes me as too small to make this a convincing stand-alone 4K package. It also effectively reintroduces the record-time limit I was hoping to avoid.

In the UK, buyers are offered a much more immediately useful 128GB CFast bundle, or can (apparently) opt to buy the XC10 without any CFast card whatsoever.

Any chance North American buyers might be given similar options?