Jump to content

Canon XF 605 - First test by Danilo Del Tufo


Danilo Del Tufo
 Share

Recommended Posts

First test under very bright sun, and little promo for an organic farm. Shooting animals that moves very quickly has forced me to make a lot of panning, but it was the first time with the camera to shoot outdoors, so please sorry the sense of seasickness with panning shots. Enjoy! 🙂

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

EOSHD Pro Color 5 for Sony cameras EOSHD Z LOG for Nikon CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs

I miss camcorders so much, it's just hard not having a bigger sensor. It's also hard to justify dropping $4k or more to get one of the better ones given how much they decrease in value. At least with mirror less cameras your lenses retain the bulk of their value even though the bodies don't. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes ...but it's an all in one, reliable, nothing to add

Fashion is FF and there is the DVX 200 in M4/3 at the same price, only it won't have the look of a Hybrid M4/3...

It is a choice according to his real needs ... that of the customer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well actually, there are 'other options'...

I used a 1" camcorder for all my longer form static work for quite a few years, the Sony FDR AX100.

My only issue with it was that it was a camcorder and therefore not 'sexy'.

There was just something about it that I felt made me feel a little amateurish at weddings, especially the time when some guest turned up with some pro shoulder rig...

I ditched it and went with the Sony ZV1 when that came out.

OK, it's marketed as a 'vlogging' camera, but is tiny/discrete, has the same sensor, a faster lens and unlimited recording if using a power bank.

It's AF is better, but it only goes up to '70mm'. This latter point is not an issue for me.

I mainly use it as backup for ceremonies and speeches but quite often use the footage for the main productions if the backup angle works better...which it often does. (The backup angle is the one I generally cannot physically get to during ceremonies especially without becoming highly visible).

I don't think I could go back to using a camcorder and certainly wouldn't pay big bucks for one, but I can see how they'd work for some.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, the RX10 and RX100 models also use this sensor and the RX10 especially makes for a very valid camcorder alternative.

I had the RX10ii and it was great for my needs.

These so called 'bridge' cameras have all but died out I think though?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MrSMW said:

These so called 'bridge' cameras have all but died out I think though?

I'd be curious to know if there were still a niche or two for these types of cameras.  Certainly the vlogging community has created a need for simple/small/light/discrete cameras, and not all of them have interchangeable lenses, especially when the ones with fixed lenses have such fast glass normally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, kye said:

I'd be curious to know if there were still a niche or two for these types of cameras.

I don’t know Kye but I suspect the overall decline in the volume of camera sales combined with the growth of mirrorless combined with the fact they had a bit of an ‘image problem’?

Just guessing really but probably not far off the truth.

It’s mirrorless and the phone today isn’t it..??

Where they spoiled it for me was when the superzooms began to takeover sacrificing fast apertures.

That’s why I never went past the RX10ii because if I remember correctly, they went to lenses for observing debris on the moon that required a tripod.

I always wanted (and still do!) a 35-70mm f2 version of the Fuji X100.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, MrSMW said:

I don’t know Kye but I suspect the overall decline in the volume of camera sales combined with the growth of mirrorless combined with the fact they had a bit of an ‘image problem’?

Just guessing really but probably not far off the truth.

It’s mirrorless and the phone today isn’t it..??

Where they spoiled it for me was when the superzooms began to takeover sacrificing fast apertures.

That’s why I never went past the RX10ii because if I remember correctly, they went to lenses for observing debris on the moon that required a tripod.

I always wanted (and still do!) a 35-70mm f2 version of the Fuji X100.

Yes, the whole pocket camera market gradually got eaten by smartphones, and as you say many of the fast short zooms got "upgraded" to slower super zooms in subsequent models.

One thing I'm surprised that no-one has released is a camera with a zoom that starts wider than 24mm equivalent.  To me, vlogging is a niche that still requires a compact and flexible camera, which is something that can benefit from having an integrated lens due to the ability to integrate the lens (especially any folding mechanisms) into the space occupied by the camera.

I would have thought a pocketable camera with a flip screen, decent directional mic setup, 18-50mm equivalent lens, and either 1" or MFT sensor would be a pretty popular option.  the challenge for vlogging is that 24mm isn't wide enough and you need to extend the camera with a handle of some kind which makes it more cumbersome to use and carry, plus a wider lens is always useful for taking landscape shots which is what tourists want to do every time they stand somewhere and say "wow".

Panasonic releasing the 10-25mm lens was an interesting move as it's a 20-50mm which sacrifices the long end of a 24-70 to give a bit more width, whereas the 16-35 lenses are a bit short at 35mm rather than 50mm.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, MrSMW said:

These so called 'bridge' cameras have all but died out I think though?

Well I have used 2 Panasonic FZ1000 bridge cameras in a live setting. You desperately need a cage and hdmi clamp, but the image is good compared to cameras in this price range. Featureset is identical to a Panasonic g7, so you still get zebras, cinelike d, peaking, etc. Plus you get that flexible camcorder-level zoom, but with a bigger sensor than $600 camcorders. And if the subject is far away from a wall and you are zoomed in substantially, you do get shallow DOF. Clean HDMI output, 4k 24, 30, or 1080 60. You just can’t simultaneously record internally. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

These bridge cameras are underrated though. High-end camcorder quality but WAY cheaper than comparable camcorder options. And in a live setting where you can’t just move the camera around like crazy, you need that flexibility to have a wide 25mm shot but then zoom in to like 400mm for the ultra/closeup of someone on stage, clear at the end of the room. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canon XC10, RX10 II, Panasonic fz2500, all AMAZING as camcorder alternatives. For my personal work I prefer full frame mirrorless, with bridge cameras I just can’t replicate that look of even a nifty fifty, with that 1.8 shallow DOF and high DR. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, 92F said:

Yes ...but it's an all in one, reliable, nothing to add

Fashion is FF and there is the DVX 200 in M4/3 at the same price, only it won't have the look of a Hybrid M4/3...

It is a choice according to his real needs ... that of the customer

I'm not knocking him for using a camcorder. I genuinely miss using them. But it's hard for me to justify investing that kind of money when their value on the used market is so low. With my mirrorless set up I have my lenses retain value and can be used when upgrading. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FHDcrew said:

I prefer full frame mirrorless, with bridge cameras I just can’t replicate that look of even a nifty fifty, with that 1.8 shallow DOF and high DR. 

Well that was it for me, but Fuji ‘S35’:

I had some fun with an RX10ii plus RX100v combo that I used on a project in the Faroe Islands, but it was that time that also convinced me to go bigger than 1”.

5 hours ago, kye said:

24mm isn't wide enough and you need to extend the camera with a handle of some kind which makes it more cumbersome to use and carry

Carry maybe and I have never used one but I would have thought an extendable handle would make it better to hold/use?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MrSMW said:

Carry maybe and I have never used one but I would have thought an extendable handle would make it better to hold/use?

Your homework assignment is to set a timer for a random number of minutes, then leave your house.  Every time the timer goes off, reset the timer to a new random number of minutes and pull out your camera and then record yourself for 1 minute without stopping or ruining the composition.  You must record for a full minute regardless of where you are or what you are doing.

Once you have done that, you will understand why adding a handle to a camera makes it far less practical to use when out and about.  This is literally what vloggers do - they record in their car, in the grocery store, in the line at the grocery store, walking down the street, walking on the beach, riding a bike under a bridge, etc.

Link to comment
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...