Jump to content

Canon XC10 versus Sony RX10 III. The Canon is underrated!


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 211
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I've just finished filming a short film.  We used 5D Raw, A7s + speed booster, GH4 + speed booster, and the XC10.  The best looking and "organic moving" footage in my opinion came from the 5D Raw and

Canon have the colour-path and codec nailed to perfection on the XC10. I am also impressed with the dynamic range of the sensor, even in the most contrasty picture profile it rarely struggles no matte

All cameras are good these days.  If you're still a spec sheet nerd, good for you.  The pros I know will use anything that ultimately does the job.  Even cheap "plasticy" cameras with lower build qual

Posted Images

  • Administrators
3 hours ago, Django said:

It's funny I've had the opposite reaction towards this camera. Thought it was interesting on paper (4K, 422, decent codec & canon log under $2K had me sold) but in actual use it was a huge let down. Number one issue the lens and specifically the unusable focus ring. I see MF listed in the cons of the review but it can't be stressed enough how shitty it is. It seems Andrew may overcome this issue because he considers the AF to be ace but it isn't DPAF good either imo, and goofy MF is a deal breaker for me. I was also far from blown away by the IQ, but this type of lens just isn't my cup of tea I'm afraid.. 

There are so many options out there for manual focus, why would you use the XC10 this way at all? It's designed to be used in auto mode.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"why would you use the XC10 this way"

I think for some of us, the hope is that a Hybrid cam can be an all rounder for more than one style of production. Many simply can't afford an arsenal of specialized cameras. What is your camera count, Andrew?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kidzrevil said:

Spec debates are nonsense these days.

Ironically, I think lots of folks ultimately use these hybrid cameras for rather mundane personal purposes.  They're the one that seem to be clamoring for a camera that does absolutely everything top in class.  And oh, for 1-2K please.

One thing I believe I've sussed out from online rants about specs is that a camera enthusiast is not necessarily an accomplished craftsman or an artist. (not that there's anything wrong with that)  Maybe they just like playing with new toys and want what they think is the best; not that they'd do anything terribly creative with it, but they got one, dangnabit!

God bless 'em though.  They're the ones keeping the market alive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@fuzzynormal bingo ! For the most parts its the hobbiest ready & willing to kill each other off of specs. They can talk you to death about how a camera is better because it can do 4K at 120p and yours only does it at 60p. Thats the defining criteria for them : some #'s on paper. If we are in the business of creating images then show me the image such and such camera creates. Thats where I stand with cameras in general. You see a bunch of people here talking up the xc10 here, some say they own it but I have yet to see a link to things they shot with it. What I do hear when I visit forums is people defending or berrating a camera they haven't seen nor touched because of something Philip Bloom said (for lack of a better example). These are toys to some people for real. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow, there's no need to argue over camera guys... it's like arguing which women available will make the best wife.... everyone, and everything is different. 

I happen to think the XC10 is the better video camera, but neither of the cameras are right for me. There are other options. It's not important. 

What is important however, is whether you have selected the right camera for you, and if that camera services your creativity. 

Some days, my iPhone will be the better camera of the A7S II. Whatever. Let's make stuff. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I want to hate the XC-10 for all the limitations:

No raw stills / No 120 FPS slow motion @ 1080 or higher / No histogram / No electronic level / Slow lens / Small sensor / No PDAF / no XLR / no separate viewfinder / 4k to CFAST 2.0 only / not great in low light (compared to a7s ii or even a6300 from what I've seen / insufficient ND

Out of all these the only 2 real bummers for me are the lack of good slow-mo and a lack of a level (my vision sucks and I'm always slightly crooked for sports / field shooting).  Everything else I can deal with.

The image is fantastic and the price is steadily coming down.  Canon log, light, good bitrate, clean hdmi out, built in IS.

Re-do this with a s35 sensor and add slow motion and I'll take a couple.

Here's a fantastic video that demonstrates many of the features.  Seems strange that the new firmware that reduces rolling shutter disables face detection.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eb4EAicr8Ec

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Viet Bach Bui said:

Apples to oranges.

The XC10 should be compared to the AX100 from Sony, not the RX10 II which is primarily a stills camera.

EDIT: actually the Sony X70 is a better match since it's got the same MSRP as the XC10.

Exactly, given how bad the XC10 is at photography  (only jpegs!!) then it is totally fair to compare it with the Sony X70. Or even the Sony AX100

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand Canon is saving the real video muscle for  "Cinema" line, at least as far as large single sensor interchangeable lens cameras.  But, I'd love to have a nice compact ENG style camera in my arsenal.  RIght now its either SONY or Panasonic in terms of new 1" and micro 4/3 sensors.  Canon has the nice color and good glass, they just need to decide to update their standard camcorders.  Could they be super competitive in the $3,000-$4,000 of course, if they actually wanted to.  All the XC10 does is make me wish they had a camera, they don't yet have.  A (4K) 13 stop, C-log, version of an XF-200.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've had the opportunity to shoot with the Canon XC10 and honestly, it impressed me from day one. The image quality and codec make this system absolutely worth it. It is made to go with you and perform with very little compromise. DOF as stated is a hurdle from time to time but not a deal breaker. As it was pointed out in the Cons of the article summary no RAW for sills is what had me scratching my head and the only thing that really bothered me. It feels like this camera was made to live on a gimbal because of the quality of shots that you can get out of it in 4K. I have a wide range of shots in this video in case anyone is interested in checking it out. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Administrators
2 hours ago, IronFilm said:

Exactly, given how bad the XC10 is at photography  (only jpegs!!) then it is totally fair to compare it with the Sony X70. Or even the Sony AX100

I can compare it to an onion if I want.

It's my website blog

By the way, it's a blog about VIDEO

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've just finished filming a short film.  We used 5D Raw, A7s + speed booster, GH4 + speed booster, and the XC10.  The best looking and "organic moving" footage in my opinion came from the 5D Raw and the xc10 in 4k.  The a7s was the 3rd best and the gh4 was the sharpest "out of camera".  We could have comfortably shot the whole thing on the XC10.  

Unsharpened ungraded CLOG frame grabs. Having a 1 inch sensor is no hindrance for a shooter like me...i own multiple cameras and i light my shoots.  I'm invested in canon gear, it uses the same batteries as the 5D3, has good battery run time, doesn't overheat and captures excellent video quality that compliments 5D Raw. I don't have to carry around a 25lb camera bag with various lenses and accessories to be able to shoot dynamically with the xc10.  The only accessory I carry is a variable nd filter.  I like to minize rigging as much as possible and I don't want an xlr input on this form factor, a rode videomic pro is good enough.  The only thing i would like is a constant f/2.8 and true DPAF.  I wouldn't even bother with a C100-300 if it had those 2 features.  

Screen Shot 2016-05-27 at 10.44.32 AM.png

Screen Shot 2016-06-06 at 10.33.10 AM.png

Screen Shot 2016-06-06 at 10.33.38 AM.png

Screen Shot 2016-06-06 at 1.41.44 PM.png

More ungraded frames of CLOG + Variable ND filter of me testing the cam on a poor trapped dog.  

Screen Shot 2016-05-27 at 10.29.04 AM.png

Screen Shot 2016-05-27 at 10.30.08 AM.png

Screen Shot 2016-05-27 at 10.30.44 AM.png

Screen Shot 2016-05-27 at 10.31.07 AM.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...