Canon XC10 4K video and stills camcorder
- Thread starter Terry_Lasater
- Start date
stevedocmaker
Well-known member
It looks intriguing. I've been down on Canon products for some time, but they may have something here. There's just not enough data yet though.
philiplipetz
Veteran
Photojournalists need the broadcast codec found only in the XC10 among 1" sensor fixed lens cameras. They will appreciate the mechanical shutter if it delivers smoother "more filmlike" motion cadence. These two factors are placing the XC10 on our watch list.
As for the the admittedly poor sample video of the girl wandering around Paris, it looks like the videographer may have used the EOS dslr emulating setting in order to counteract the dull lighting. The colors certainly seem to be similar to what we see on that setting on our C100s. If so then I would expect 7-8 stops real DR, with highlight clipping. Perhaps we have not seen what this camera can do with C Log and Wide DR settings.
People hated the specs on our C100s but they over delivered. And they are a joy to use. It seems as if the XC10 may similarly be designed for ease of use in changing situations.
I know I will be shouted down here, but our nonprofit values easily acquired images that we can deliver anywhere, not camera specs.
Last edited:
How do you figure that, comparing to RX10? According to this link http://www.dpreview.com/articles/1113663915/opinion-why-the-canon-xc10-is-a-big-deal, both cameras do HD at 50mbps. And they both use H.264 wrapped in MXF, as far as I know. Perhaps you meant the color sampling and bit depth instead, i.e. 422 10 bit vs 420 8 bit (not sure about both numbers for the two cameras)? It's possible that an RX10 with an external recorder might still come out ahead in price/performance ratio, for HD.
The thing that fascinates me about that RX10 is that lens. They checked off ALL the right boxes with that thing. The major bummer about it is that, as far as I know, it still limits clips to 30 minutes.
The mechanical shutter sounded interesting, but it appears from the Canon press release that it's just for stills. In other words, it's just a regular stills shutter like every other higher-end stills camera uses:
"Still-photography features include a mechanical shutter to help eliminate rolling-shutter distortion, up to 2.8 fps performance" source: http://www.usa.canon.com/cusa/profe...s/uhd_hd_video_cameras/uhd_video_cameras/xc10
Edit: I just read that the XC10 doesn't do raw stills either.
Edit2: Um, no real viewfinder either, just something that redirects the LCD. No wonder this thing is getting bashed all over the internet.
Last edited:
philiplipetz
Veteran
I stand by needing 4:2:2 color for broadcast.
Last edited:
philiplipetz
Veteran
Post withdrawn. I quoted a secondary source that was in error.
Last edited:
There can be rolling shutter distortion on stills too. That's why electronic shutters are not used as the primary shutter on higher-end stills cameras. Some cameras have that as a feature, but it's for specialized uses. Notice that they started the sentence that we both quoted with "still-photography features include a mechanical shutter..."
philiplipetz
Veteran
You are absolutely right. I was wrong. Got my quote from a secondary source. Cannon states it exactly as you quote.
No problem, I just wanted to clarify it. It's weird that they mentioned that since it's such a common feature in stills cameras. I had also seen other people mention the mechanical shutter in other filmmaking forums, but finally decided to dig a bit more since I was curious. That would be a very unusual feature for a video camera in this price range. The camera does have some positives, but also a lot of negatives. We'll see how it plays out.
Well, depends, but for some uses I can see merit in shooting 4K video not because you actually want the video in 4K, but because you may want framegrabs at 4K resolution?
So if a photojournalist is required to produce stills and video *at the same time*, 4K may have a lot of merit?
Samuel H
Major Contributor
Yes, but then the video has to have a relatively high shutter speed, or the stills will be blurred. I get that the XC10 will have its market, but I think it's a very small niche (it would be much bigger at $1000, but it's not really affordable for such a limited tool).
4:2:2 originally came about because of interlace TV systems. The reason it was seen as sensible to halve chroma resolution with respect to luminance in the horizontal axis but not the vertical was purely because of the problems associated with the field structure and interlace. Move to progressive systems and all that goes away - it makes far more sense to have 4:2:0 as the (symmetrical) norm, and 4:4:4 for the ultimate "no-compromise approach".
Unfortunately "I need 4:2:2" has just become a cry in itself. For NTSC SD then yes - very sensible! For interlace HD, well maybe still so. But for 4K, progressive by default? Far, far less relevant. Heck, for 4:2:0 4K the chroma resolution in itself is the same as for luminance in a 1080 system!
Yes, and as I wrote I thought exactly the same. I don't advocate the approach if it can be avoided - but I can well see circumstances nowadays where a single person is required to shoot video and stills at the same time, end of story. If it has to be so, then you're quite right - it's not ideal, but 4K video can only help. And a lot may depend on whether a tripod is used, and if we're talking about fast movement in the scene?
Banding is much less of an issue with a 35-50Mbps or higher 8 bit 4:2:2 codec than it is with 4:2:0.
No, not necessarily true, as banding can be caused by too high compression ratio.
So for a given bitrate, 4:2:2 will mean more chroma samples to compress, and for that fixed bitrate therefore must mean a higher compression ratio.
dustylense
Veteran
I have a real estate client that builds skyscrapers and always wants me to film and produce stills of their properties from the air. I shoot 4K video and produce both from the footage and they are happy as a clam. I go up twice a month for them.
obviously these are compressed due to web, but with the originals I produce clean crisp 30in. prints for them all the time.
From the inspire 1
Stop worrying about camera specs, go out and get the shot.
gorgeous work
tell me something from your experience if you did any testing... how large you think it is possible to go with a grab extracted from 4K video? 44in. prints? 36in. prints?
tell me something from your experience if you did any testing... how large you think it is possible to go with a grab extracted from 4K video? 44in. prints? 36in. prints?
Last edited: