VanDaven

You can configure the wheel on the XC10 to change ISO instead if aperture (shutter is also possible). For many run&gun applications this is actually easier. Just set the aperture to f5.6 and off you go. While it takes a bit of practice hovering through those menus is really easy. 

What advantages does EditReady have in regards to Adobe Media Encoder (the software I am using to get XF-AVC into FCPX)? Is it also able to handle 100fps XF-AVC? 

Congratulations, it would be really interesting if you could some audio comparison between the Rode and the built-in mic as I was of the opinion that the sound quality of the built-in is not that bad (for pure stereo atmo). 

Hi Mattias, thanks a lot for your comment. You caught me on a lazy day , so I decided to put a short video on Vimeo because in this instance pictures show more than a thousand words. 

Cheers, Martin

It's simply Gaffer's tape and a http://bluestarproducts.ca/eyecushions.php but you can also find some by Kinotehnik on B&H. 

Definitely reminds me a lot of a micro EX1. Definitely easier to handle than a DSLR, and way better image quality "right out of the box" than all of the DSLRs I used. Some details remain to be solved from the sides of Canon that I would like to address as well: 

• Noise Reduction: Would be nice if the amount of NR could be user-defined. Now it just kicks in at some point and mashes up footage from ISO5000 and above. 

• Compatibility with Final Cut Pro X: At the moment, I am using Adobe Media Encoder CC2015 to convert the XC10-Footage to Apple PRORES. C'mon guys, bring out a plug-in of some sort. 

• RAW images: If Canon wants us to take the XC10 serious as a tool for still photography, capturing RAWs is inevitable. And very easy to implement...

One word about audio quality: As you can see in the picture of my previous post, I am utilizing the Beachtek MCC-2 to mix the signals from a Rode Videomic Pro Rycote and the Rode Filmmaker wireless kit. Even though audio recording is 16 bit only on the XC10, it gave me a dynamic range of about 67 dB on silent passages in a studio environment. Given the fact that any 16 bit audio signal below -50 dBFS is rather unusable, the performance is good enough for recording ENG dialog. 

Finally I could spend some (very limited) time outside and also some time to hack it together: 

Not the best that I could do but gives some additional impression over the capabilities of the XC10 in bright daylight. 

Here's a photo of my XC10 ENG configuration that has been tested and hopefully soon will see some real action for a report:

Cheers!

I bought a Lexar too, the CFast 2.0 cards work "right out of the box" and I would recommend them to anyone who wants to have less trouble than I had. In comparison to what I paid for the Sony SxS PRO+ cards for my larger camera, even CFast 2.0's are a steal ;). 

Definitely the budget alternative to another C100 / 300 and very capable once you learn to work around its shortcomings. For example, under certain circumstances, it is way better to set the dial to ISO and keep the aperture at f5.6. By the way, I was able to get the Atomos CFast 1.0 working now (after multiple passes of formats on the computer). 

Yes, the Atomos Cfast1 128GB definitely does not work with 305 Mbps. Maybe that one reviewer was lucky to get an extraordinairy fast card...

By the way, there is some misinformation on the internet stating that the XC10 4K recording also works flawlessly with a previous generation Cfast1 card. Unfortunately, that is not true in my case, Cfast1 is too slow for 305 mbps 4K and ONLY works for 205 mbps 4K.

I will try as soon as I have some time off work!

I am not too blown away by the XC10 as a photo camera to be honest. Und sufficient light the images are ok. The lack of RAW capabilities is definitely a downer, if Canon wants users to take the XC10 serious as a true hybrid, RAW photos will be hopefully added in a future firmware update. 

I see the XC10 as a 16mm UHD-capable video camera that comes with DSLR-like design and handling. Up to now I didn't notice any aliasing or moiré in the video material, which I appreciate very much. 

I don't see it as a limitation at all, every time I look at footage from the XC10 I think of 16mm. Given it's size, I think the 1" sensor has an impressive performance up to ISO 4000. After that, things get a little bit fuzzy because the noise reduction is starting to kick in like crazy and the picture gets a bit fuzzy. Tested the XC10 at ISO10000 today and it still delivers something (that you can sharpen / add grain to in post).

I have been running 'round with the Canon L 24-105 f4 on my (long-gone) 5D3 for years and also Sony's recommended lens for the FS7 is a constant f4 (and that's - also - not even a 5x zoom). 

I think it was never that affordable before to get Canon (broadcast) quality images out of an ultra-portable device.

While I was also rather skeptical about the XC10, I ordered it and I am definitely going to keep it. While it is definitely true that the lens performance in regards to shifting aperture is annoying, there are enough positives about this little camera that make it a keeper for me. 

• Image quality: Absolutely stunning and in all regards a "baby C300". At 1080p, I don't like the 35 mbps 25p too much, but the 50 mbps / 50p looks absolutely gorgeous. I own a 4K-upgraded F5 and a GH4 (speedbooster / Canon glass and the inevitable 12-35). Looks definitely much nicer "out of the box" than my GH4. 

• Lens: Only wide open gives you f2.8, the higher the focal length the less the f-stop up to f5.6. That is a bummer, but else the optical performance of the lens is excellent. No focus breathing and it's parfocal. Other than most the Canon L-glass I use, the T-stop is also the same at any focal length. Also worth mentioning: The lens will maintain the (higher) aperture if you set it, meaning if you set it to f5.6 it will also stay on the same f-stop at wider zoom stages. The camera electronics maintain this constant f-stop in a pretty quickly, only a full crash-zoom will shortly lead to a slightly brighter image (nothing like the flashy Panasonic 12-35). Manual focus is fly-by-wire, the camera offers three different modes for that (slow / normal / fast). The lens only closes to f11, but a built-in ND filters makes up for that. 

• IS: Optical & digital (only at HD recording) image stabilization is pretty effective and makes handheld shooting without adding additional weight a breeze. 

• Sensor crop: In case you're still fine with recording HD, sensor crop mode can also be activated in 2 different ways: First off, you can select a 2x crop mode that is not quite as sharp as the downsampled, but hey, you at least get 50mm focal length @ f2.8. Second way to crop in is to use the dynamic digital image stabilization which crops into the image by about 13,5%.

• Body, controls and loupe: The design of the body with the rotating hand-grip is very smart and well-balanced, much easier for handheld operation in comparison to a regular still image camera. Only three user-assignable buttons mean that a number of functions (like ISO, audio gain etc.) have to be assigned from the menu via the (very precise) joystick, but at least for me it was easy to get used to this. Imho still better than the tight layout of the C300 (where you can accidentally touch a couple of buttons by just picking up the body). The included loupe solution that you just stick on the viewfinder is a very good idea. It distorts a little bit, but I prefer this solution any day when shooting outside on the GH4 (without an additional EVF unit). It tilts really easily and is very comfortable. 

Personal Usage: 

Working with heavier camera setups (PDW700 ENG, F5/55 etc.) makes me often wish for something lightweight and versatile, especially for news / report / documentary B-roll shots. That's what I got the GH4 for, but I never really liked the image (and I experimented a lot with different settings). Now that I bought the XC10, the GH4 will stay in the storage more often. Even though it has some drawbacks and might not appeal to some users, the form factor, zoom range, image quality etc. is ideal for my applications. I could even imagine shooting documentaries and reports purely on the XC10. 

Price: Here in Europe the XC10 sells for a little bit less than 2K €. What you get for the money is an interesting design of a "DSLR-like" fixed-lens camera. If you don't need 4K and want to use expensive Cfast media, choose the cheap SD alternative and work in HD. The 1" sensor still gives you sufficient bokeh even at f5.6. 

While the XC10 might not be the best solution for many users, it does not deserve the bashing it gets on the web. And just a reminder: One of the most practical lenses in the "affordable" range for DSLRs is the Canon L 24-105, which has a constant f4 (definitely not a constant T), is not parfocal, has focus breathing, much inferior IS, is less sharp and still costs about 860 €. The XC10 stays on f4 until about 70mm.