Jump to content
Andrew Reid

Canon XC10 4K camcorder

Recommended Posts

EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony CamerasEOSHD C-LOG and Film Profiles for All Canon DSLRs
16 hours ago, mercer said:

This is why I stopped using 100% zebras and started using 70%. At 100% I could not save any of the highlights, they were gone. But I actually have had two cameras. BH accidentally sent me a return, but I tried it out and had those results. After speaking with a few people on this site, I was told to use 70% because of the whole 18% grey card exposure rule for C-Log. I was told, if you don't use a grey card to expose (I never have) than the simplest, safest way was to use 70% zebras. When I received my new camera. I went right into using 70% and it seemed to work fine. Since then I was told to use 100% but I haven't had the camera out in a while, to give it another test. 

Mercer I think you're an FCPX user? Having looked at the documentation from apple the log processing feature was actually present before 10.3 so if I were you I'd find those old clips that were getting blown and see if that was the problem. In the inspector choose the info tab and at the bottom change the drop down menu to "settings". Set log processing to none and voila, no clipping! I bet that's what your issue was too. For some reason it only started happening to me after I updated to 10.3 but it's worth a try...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Lintelfilm said:

Mercer I think you're an FCPX user? Having looked at the documentation from apple the log processing feature was actually present before 10.3 so if I were you I'd find those old clips that were getting blown and see if that was the problem. In the inspector choose the info tab and at the bottom change the drop down menu to "settings". Set log processing to none and voila, no clipping! I bet that's what your issue was too. For some reason it only started happening to me after I updated to 10.3 but it's worth a try...

Thanks Lintel. I will look into this. If this is the case, I'll have to reevaluate everything. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, BenEricson said:

Was messing around with C-LOG around the house. Has anyone ran into this artifact? Lens is zoomed all the way in with C-LOG at iso 500 I think. I haven't seen this on any other footage.

Artifact.jpg

Nah I haven't seen this. The xc10 is literally Pandoras Box. Damn thing is full of surprises lmao

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Little cut I made from some footage over the weekend. Camera is surprisingly good. My biggest critique is still the lack of heavier ND, because anything shot at F11 in the sun is pretty much unusable in my opinion. The camera looks good shallow. Im happy that you can get little quick zooms without flicker, reminds of shooting super 8.

All shot C-LOG except the first shot of the rain on the trees and the last clip, which is EOS standard I think. The image stabilizer is definitely really good. The image reminds me more of the C100 than the C300ii. 

I needed a camera that I could throw on a tripod for double angles and get quick coverage when a larger camera cannot be used. This seems to check those boxes. C-LOG looks like it can be temperamental, but much better than log profiles on most DSLRs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BenEricson said:

 

Little cut I made from some footage over the weekend. Camera is surprisingly good. My biggest critique is still the lack of heavier ND, because anything shot at F11 in the sun is pretty much unusable in my opinion. The camera looks good shallow. Im happy that you can get little quick zooms without flicker, reminds of shooting super 8.

All shot C-LOG except the first shot of the rain on the trees and the last clip, which is EOS standard I think. The image stabilizer is definitely really good. The image reminds me more of the C100 than the C300ii. 

I needed a camera that I could throw on a tripod for double angles and get quick coverage when a larger camera cannot be used. This seems to check those boxes. C-LOG looks like it can be temperamental, but much better than log profiles on most DSLRs. 

Damn you guys with your great videos. Really nice. I haven't had the time to use my XC10 for a couple months now, so I was contemplating selling it rather than it sitting there collecting dust and then I see both yours and kidz work... 

Seriously Ben, probably the most filmic image I have seen from the XC10... it really does look like 16mm.

Was this 1080p?

Share this post


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

 

Little cut I made from some footage over the weekend. Camera is surprisingly good. My biggest critique is still the lack of heavier ND, because anything shot at F11 in the sun is pretty much unusable in my opinion. The camera looks good shallow. Im happy that you can get little quick zooms without flicker, reminds of shooting super 8.

All shot C-LOG except the first shot of the rain on the trees and the last clip, which is EOS standard I think. The image stabilizer is definitely really good. The image reminds me more of the C100 than the C300ii. 

I needed a camera that I could throw on a tripod for double angles and get quick coverage when a larger camera cannot be used. This seems to check those boxes. C-LOG looks like it can be temperamental, but much better than log profiles on most DSLRs. 

God damn that looks good ! Was this shot at the base iso for C-LOG ? This is amazing 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, kidzrevil said:

God damn that looks good ! Was this shot at the base iso for C-LOG ? This is amazing 

 

1 hour ago, mercer said:

Damn you guys with your great videos. Really nice. I haven't had the time to use my XC10 for a couple months now, so I was contemplating selling it rather than it sitting there collecting dust and then I see both yours and kidz work... 

Seriously Ben, probably the most filmic image I have seen from the XC10... it really does look like 16mm.

Was this 1080p?

Thanks for the kind words guys. This thread has been a great resource for me.

This was all shot 305mb/24p. If you have a 4k monitor, you should be able to play it at 4k.

All base ISO of 500. I tried to shoot between f4-f8 but wasnt always possible since I didn't pack the variable nd. There were some clips shot at f11 that were useless in my opinion. Too sharp, with zero depth to the image. Some other stuff at that bridge I wanted to cut in but it didn't look right. It's almost like the bit rate isn't high enough to render all of that detail with everything in focus, probably why shallow stuff tends to look better. 

I have the c300ii LUT pack and the log-to-rec709 works well in a lot of situations. I can host it on one drive if you want to give it a shot. It does some nice stuff with the highlights and color. 

@kidzrevil I want to mess around with some of those filters you're using. 

Share this post


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

New video I shot in Canon LOG. BTW I am in love with this new batch of lens filters I picked up ! The grain was done in post

 

Nice work @kidzrevil - what delicious filters are you using at the moment?

15 hours ago, BenEricson said:

Was messing around with C-LOG around the house. Has anyone ran into this artifact? Lens is zoomed all the way in with C-LOG at iso 500 I think. I haven't seen this on any other footage.

 

Yes, I've seen it before... and I'm sure I'll see it again! I've noticed it on single frames only.

 

6 hours ago, BenEricson said:

 

This was all shot 305mb/24p. If you have a 4k monitor, you should be able to play it at 4k.

... It's almost like the bit rate isn't high enough to render all of that detail with everything in focus, probably why shallow stuff tends to look better. 

 

Thanks for posting - great to see what others are up to! Some great tonality there. I totally hear you about detailed shots becoming mush. Must check out kidzrevil's recommendation to try other picture styles with sharpness whacked up. And please do post your lut @BenEricson

Here's my shots from a weekend break in Belfast - I can sense the mush in lots of them even when downscaled to 1080p. 


Camera: 4K C-Log, ISO500, ETTR where possible, WB Cloudy, Tiffen 1/4 Black Pro Mist.


Post: white balance tweak → levels → my simple curve posted as a lut on previous page.

EDIT: I think my lovely grain did not survive the vimeo compression too well :weary:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick question for the XC10/15 owners here.... How do you think it would cope as a wedding camera (1080p, stablised, lots of 60fps)?

I imagine i'd need to use something else for the night shots... but overall seems to check alot of boxes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be better for outdoors stuff or very bright interiors I'd say Jimmy as f5.6 in a church or function room will necessitate a high ISO at 180 degree shutter 60fps and you'll get ghosting (XC10), softness and noise.

And wouldn't you need shallow DOF for a wedding?

If not, then yes stabilisation is great and you can nail a lot of shots very easily and quickly. Also a nice cam to stick on a gimbal because of its deep DOF and smooth auto exposure.

Beware of the brittleness of the codec in HD, though, especially at 60fps.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@BenEricson @hyalinejim Again great work guys, you two are REALLY pushing the camera and getting some great images !

I am currently using a tiffen black satin 1 & 3 (the 3 is too strong for C-LOG but ok for the other profiles). It's more of an invisible diffusion it just helps reduce fine detail and subtle gradations in shadows that dont compress well. Also it affects the bokeh with a texture some people won't like but I don't mind it.

The Tiffen Pearlescent is what I will use for C-LOG only because of how it affects highlights. That filter is purely for aesthetic purposes but is not as aggressive as a pro mist will be on a 4K camera. Im sure the tiffen black pearlescent will be better for this camera.

the tiffen ultra contrast is good to lift the shadows from the problematic areas of the codec. An HDTV-FX is probably better cause of the reduction of fine detail and the ultra contrast element in it.

@Jimmy I don't think you should get this camera for weddings. Its slow at the tele end and frustrating to use. You have to use it a lot to get used to how it works in the field. I use my xc10 as a 28mm prime & i highly doubt you would want that look for a wedding

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hyalinejim said:

Nice work @kidzrevil - what delicious filters are you using at the moment?

Yes, I've seen it before... and I'm sure I'll see it again! I've noticed it on single frames only.

 

Thanks for posting - great to see what others are up to! Some great tonality there. I totally hear you about detailed shots becoming mush. Must check out kidzrevil's recommendation to try other picture styles with sharpness whacked up. And please do post your lut @BenEricson

Here's my shots from a weekend break in Belfast - I can sense the mush in lots of them even when downscaled to 1080p. 


Camera: 4K C-Log, ISO500, ETTR where possible, WB Cloudy, Tiffen 1/4 Black Pro Mist.


Post: white balance tweak → levels → my simple curve posted as a lut on previous page.

EDIT: I think my lovely grain did not survive the vimeo compression too well :weary:

I like what that filter does to the highlights on top of the very nice looking footage. Did you use any stabilisation in post or do you just have a very steady hand :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a steady hand at all - it's all down to the XC10! For some shots I turned on the Power IS - the 4k only IS option that helps with static handheld shots. But when you turn off and on again that setting is not remembered for some weird reason.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, hyalinejim said:

It would be better for outdoors stuff or very bright interiors I'd say Jimmy as f5.6 in a church or function room will necessitate a high ISO at 180 degree shutter 60fps and you'll get ghosting (XC10), softness and noise.

And wouldn't you need shallow DOF for a wedding?

If not, then yes stabilisation is great and you can nail a lot of shots very easily and quickly. Also a nice cam to stick on a gimbal because of its deep DOF and smooth auto exposure.

Beware of the brittleness of the codec in HD, though, especially at 60fps.

Well, Jimmy should get a XC15 to avoid the ghosting issue, then he could go high on ISO.

Any news from Canon about the ghosting?, XC10 is now really cheap in second hand market, and it is really a good option if that ghosting is fixed by firmware.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Everyone, could use some advice. I'm thinking of purchasing an XC10 or XC15. 

I'm currently shooting a documentary, and for the interviews I was considering shooting in 4K with the XC15 to simulate a multi-camera setup with cropping for 1080p delivery. Would the lower bitrate 4K provide good results in a controlled, well lit scenario? Just seems easier than dealing with two cameras shooting 1080 and having to sync audio. 

Thoughts? Anyone else done something like this with good results? 

Share this post


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...