Amook

I have to agree. I see it often and think it's something canon could probably fix.

check this thread out on dvxuser

http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?349419-Looking-for-a-stabilizer-for-the-C100

@kidzrevil Not sure, as far as exposing for c-log I just set zebras to 100% and try not to clip anything except if I'm shooting a person who is strongly back lit. One thing i've noticed is the lcd screen is rather dark so it looks like the shadows are under exposed but the footage actually turns out much brighter. I don't have much experience with color grading footage so i've stuck to using curves and saturation which i've been happy with so far. I do think c-log in HD can look soft so i've started applying sharpening through fcx. The camera is definitely not perfect. The biggest problem I have with it is when I use high iso's and the footage has a weird ghosting effect that looks bad with motion, I wish they would have turned down the automatic noise reduction and just let the image get grainy. It's important to keep the camera and it's limitations in perspective. If used within it's range it can be a very effective tool. It would be nice if it had a larger sensor and faster lens but there are plenty of other camera's that already have that. There are very few that are as simple to use at the same time being so effective with image quality. All I can say is experiment with it, you can always resell it and try something else.   

Here's a few clips in c-log Hd, as well as some 60p shots. I'm not a very good at color grading so I know it could be better. I had my daughter in a pack on my back of all these shots so the stabilization helped a lot.

I've gotten that weird ghosting before, but I haven't noticed it since I've updated to the newest firmware, though I haven't been shooting a lot of 4k lately. I do notice weird black dots over the image that looks like dirt. I think it shows up at higher iso's but haven't spent the time to test it yet. Here are a few still frame c-log shots. These are all ungraded straight out of the camera, just exported via resolve.

I don't want to go to off topic but it seems there are a number of people who have experience with the F3, so hope it's ok I have a few questions. I wondering about correctly exposing for s-log in run and gun situations, and being able to use the tools on the camera's lcd screen to get correct exposures. I'd like to be able to use s-log with internal recording when a external recorder would be to bulky. So will using the histogram and zebras be accurate enough? Also a question about external recorder, Atomos Blade or blackmagic video assist? I like the idea of SSD's. 

A couple more 60p clips. These were shot on the standard profile with sharpness turned down a couple of notches. I think for 60p footage it may need the sharpening turned up a little bit more. Also the last shot of the fence is because the lens had gotten pretty wet. I think someone who actually knows how to use resolve could make these pop a lot more. I just adjusted curves a little bit.

https://vimeo.com/150069194

tugela, which ones have the grid pattern? I see some images have weird black specs. I've also been able to produce color banding similar to canon still cameras. The problems i've found have been trying to push c-log and wide dynamic range past 800iso. The standard color profile works much better for higher iso shots. 

I'm not trying to convince anyone to buy this camera, it's not for everyone. I just see a lot of bashing of it and think it's a lot better than people think. Cameras are tools and in this price range they all have compromises.  I've been close a couple of times to selling the xc10, especially after pixel peeping between the nx1 and xc10. But when I look at the images in motion I prefer the color and dynamic range of the canon. It's also very easy to shoot with which for me is the most important factor right now. If I was shooting in a controlled environment that might be different. In the end content is king.

Thanks mercer.

Here's a few more. What i've found, and this applies to still images as well, but if you pixel peep canon cameras you'll be disappointed. But if viewed in motion it looks great, the little color blotches disappear. I've found this to be true with their still cameras as well. Nikon and sony have a large dynamic range advantage but when you actually view a print or final web photo, canon more than holds it's own, it usually has better color. Anyway this is just what i've experienced. People tend to put to much stock into spec sheets, and you see reviews like the camera store one which looks to me like it was based on specs rather than actually using the camera. 

These are just some quick random samples with a variety of settings. I wouldn't pixel peep to much as most are canon log and not sharpened. Like I said just random shots. 

Cinegain- I'm not sure why you say it has specific qualities. I feel it's a more well rounded video camera than the gh4. There is a lot of mis information on the internet about this camera.    

I'm curious why you think the xc10 doesn't stand up to the gh4?  I've used the gh4 and gh3 and I think the xc10 is way ahead of either in image quality.  It does have a few issues, but you also have some real positives that many seem to over look.  The image stabilization is very good, I can shoot handheld at the end of the zoom and have useable footage along with shallow depth of field, there are no micro jitters like you get with DSLR's or mirrorless cameras. It has a professional HD codec with a low bit rate that will let you shoot hours of footage to cheap SD cards. I think it's way ahead of the gh4 in this regard, the hd from he camera looks like down sampled gh4 4k footage, but with much smaller file sizes and a much more robust codec. I'm finding with this camera I'm simply able to shoot a lot more better looking footage than I have with any dslr i've used, including gh4, nx1 and d810. Also don't forget sound quality, no reason to use an external recorder. For me and the style of shooting I do the XC10 is a far superior camera if I was shooting a documentary through six different countries. I watched the camera store video and to me they sound like they are trying to sell sony cameras. I can see how if you took the camera out side and walked around shooting for about twenty minutes and only tried a couple settings how you might be disappointed in the xc10. They don't mention any of the positives, which there are many.  It's like they didn't know how to use the camera. I think if they had filmed the video with the xc10 it would have looked much nicer.  On my monitor it had a green or yellow cast over everything. The more I work with cameras the more I realize resolution isn't very important, color is much more important. I personally feel it has much better color than any of the dslr offerings. Don't believe all the hype you read or watch. Having actually used the XC10 the camera store review looks silly and amateurish, or maybe they just have an agenda.  If I have some time i'll try and up load some shallow depth of field shots. 

Here's some 60p footage. It was shot in c-log so it hasn't been sharpened. The vimeo compression seems to really be doing a number on the details.

Quick few shots from this morning using the standard profile instead of c-log.

https://vimeo.com/147152855

I bought mine for $2,000 from Canada and got a cfast 128gig 2.0 card for like $160 off eBay. Here's another quick clip. I think some of the wider shots are a little out of focus but I think a couple of the seagull shots look really nice.

https://vimeo.com/146364062 

Thought i'd upload a couple samples from the xc10. Over all I really like the camera. There are a few flaws but it's very easy to shoot. I haven't used it in a professional setting yet just walking about getting used to it. I had the nx1 and looking at the footage side by side in 4k the samsung is sharper, but the canon has much richer color and the rolling shutter is much better, something that I didn't like with the nx1. All the shots were in canon log and graded in resolve which i'm just starting to learn. 

I know a shoulder rig would help and I have one, but I'm wondering about how much the stabilization from the samsung lens would help if I don't have a rig with me.  

So I had a nx1 for a week before someone stole it out of the back of my car. I really liked the camera and the images. I was mostly using the camera hand held and had a hard time wight he rolling shutter in 4k. I'm wondering if the samsung 16-50 S would be a big improvement or not. I really like shooting with the sigma 18-35 but don't think I could get away with hand holding as much as i'd like. I'd appreciate anyone has any experience with a image stabilized lens.