XC10 vs Sony RX10 ii for green screen work

M

mharrison

Member
I'm looking into getting a 4K camera in the sub $2000 range and could use some input. My main use-cases are filming in a green screen studio & low profile shooting on location. Cameras I've looked at are the Canon XC10, GH4, Sony RX100 iv and RX10 ii. Since I need to be able to film for more than 5 minutes at a time, the RX100 iv is scratched off the list. The GH4 looks promising, but once you add a Metabones (which I'd want) you're already at $2k.

The RX10 ii and XC10 look promising. For green screen work, the more color data the better. From what I've read, the RX10 ii is 4:2:2 8-bit at 100 Mbps, while the XC10 is 4:2:2 8-bit at 305 Mbps. I'm not sure why the bitrates are so different if they're both 4K and 422, 8-bit. Also, I've read conflicting accounts on whether the XC10 outputs 8-bit or 10-bit. As for low profile location shooting, they seem to be about the same.

I've handled the XC10 before, but have never had the chance to play with a RX10 ii or a GH4. Any thoughts? Your advice would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks everyone!!
 
I believe the internal recording on the RX10 II is 4:2:0 rather than 4:2:2. The HDMI output is 4:2:2 but you would need an external recorder to capture that.

XC10 definitely has the best internal codec of the bunch, although with an external recorder you can record 10-bit 4:2:2 from the GH4's HDMI output.
 
I don't mean to derail, but what about the Sony AX-100? How does that compare? I have been expecting an update, as it is 2 years old now. :(

Or the "professional " Sony PXW-X70 ? That will be $2,250 with the 4k upgrade.
 
The AX100 is 8-bit 4:2:0 internally like most consumer-level Sony cameras.

The PXW-X70 can do 10-bit 4:2:2 internally, which is a step up from the AX100 but only in HD recording. The 4K recording mode (with the upgrade) is only 60 Mbps with 4:2:0 sampling. Even the AX100 can do 100 Mbps in 4K mode. The X70 does include XLR audio inputs though, which is nice. The two cameras are fairly similar otherwise, although the X70 has more control over picture profiles. Both have more of a camcorder form factor than the other options mentioned (which may be good or bad depending on your preference). As camcorders, the AX100/X70 include a powered zoom lens (something the XC10 lacks).

One other thing to consider is how the lens specs compare, as there are some differences there:
Canon XC10 - 10x zoom f/2.8 to f/5.6
Sony RX10 II - 8.3x zoom f/2.8 constant
Sony AX100/PXW-X70 - 12x zoom f/2.8 to f/4.0
Panasonic GH4 - interchangeable lenses
 
Thanks so much DaveDV, that is very, very helpful! :)

I saw a lot of folks complaining about the 60 Mbps on the X70. Apparently there is some talk & hope for a 100 Mbps firmware update, but it is not clear if that will happen.

+++

FWIW, I also do stills, including event and wildlife stills that requires at least 2 DSLR bodies

I have a full Canon lens kit that I haven't been able to part with, plus some key, duplicate Nikon zooms, like the 24-70 and 70-200 2.8 zooms, two 4.0 zooms, etc. Along with parts of both Sony and Panasonic systems, and a bit of Samsung.

I really need to rationalize my kit and get down to 1 DSLR system and 1 mirrorless system, or self-contained video camera system. Too Many Cameras.

Back to the Original Poster. Cheers, and thanks again! :)

Best,
Michael
 
Last edited:
Thanks for all the helpful info, everyone!

AndreeOnline, did Canon go with the intra frame codec to enable users to grab high quality stills from their video clips? I know that Canon loves to market this feature.

davedv, you're right - after some more digging, I did see that the RX10 ii records 4:2:0 internally and 422 externally. Thanks for pointing that out. Apparently the GH4 is 8-bit, 4:2:0 internally as well.

So it seems if I ~really~ want 10-bit 422, then I need a GH4 + external recorder. Otherwise, it appears only the XC10 delivers 8-bit 422 internally at 4K. I've only ever keyed green screen footage shot at 8-bit 4:2:0. Some colleagues have told me that keying 8-bit 422 is not much different, but 10-bit 422 is much easier. Does this sound about right?

Thanks again everyone! :)
~Michael
 
mharrison said:
AndreeOnline, did Canon go with the intra frame codec to enable users to grab high quality stills from their video clips? I know that Canon loves to market this feature.
Click to expand...

They went with it because they could. The XC-10 and C300 mkII are now using Digic DV5 (the C300 mkII has dual DV5).

The original C100 was DVIII, the C100 mkII was DV4 and the C100 mkIII will be DV5 or better. It will also have intra frame codec.

To me, having a 422, intra frame, high bitrate codec is really a huge step up. Canon promotes the XC-10 as a 'professional camcorder' and equipping it with a solid codec is a step towards living up to that. It's obviously not their top of the line professional camera, but it shoots beautiful artifact free images.

I hope Canon can get a 4k C100 mkIII with this codec out of the door before end of year. I reeeeeeaally hope it's 10bit too, but that might be reserved for the next tier up.
 
Last edited:
unadog said:
Thanks so much DaveDV, that is very, very helpful! :)

I saw a lot of folks complaining about the 60 Mbps on the X70. Apparently there is some talk & hope for a 100 Mbps firmware update, but it is not clear if that will happen.

+++

FWIW, I also do stills, including event and wildlife stills that requires at least 2 DSLR bodies

I have a full Canon lens kit that I haven't been able to part with, plus some key, duplicate Nikon zooms, like the 24-70 and 70-200 2.8 zooms, two 4.0 zooms, etc. Along with parts of both Sony and Panasonic systems, and a bit of Samsung.

I really need to rationalize my kit and get down to 1 DSLR system and 1 mirrorless system, or self-contained video camera system. Too Many Cameras.

Back to the Original Poster. Cheers, and thanks again! :)

Best,
Michael
Click to expand...


The firmware for the Sony pxw-x70 to record at 100mbps is getting released in July...
 
^^ Thanks! :)

I thought I saw that from NAB. When I did a search, I got a lot of hits on the original, 2015 firmware upgrade. Made me a little uncertain.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top