Canon Launches New Flagship XF705 Professional Camcorder Featuring 4K Video Recording at 60P/4:2:2/10-Bit

#41
I hate these type of form factor cameras, for most things, but I wholeheartedly agree that you don't need large sensor cameras for everything. And a lot of times large sensor cams are a hinderance(especially shooting video with a DSLR). My favorite camera, to this day, is still my 2/3" P2 VariCam with 13x4.5 ENG lens. It's like Ken Rockwell says about how a camera should work, it just gets out of your way and lets you shoot. I went pretty much the entire month of August not picking up a large sensor camera. I shot pretty much 100% with my VariCam and it was SO NICE. People(mostly the young "kids") look down on 2/3" ENG cameras today, but they don't know what they're missing.
Everything has its place. They wouldn't make this camera if there wasn't a market for it.

I've heard a lot of good things about similar Panasonics, though I have never had the pleasure to use them. I used a similar setup Sony HD camera for the same kind of purpose at a different company and it did its job well, though I was more used to the Canon setup. I don't get to run around with cameras at my current gig, so it's been a while.
 
Dec 23, 2012
44
1
46
Vancouver
#42
It's shame you are stuck in the past like that. how does a camera having video features hurt someone that takes photos. simply dont use the video mode.
Well... I imagine that getting super high data rates from the sensor are mostly(high frame rate cameras excepted) a product of the focus on video. Maybe we are seeing more RnD spent on data rates rather than no-bayer sensors because of the need to meet video specs?
 
Sep 19, 2010
1,267
41
Ottawa Ontario
#43
Not only do I not care for video recording, it is worse than that: in many ways it is an obstacle for optimal stills shooting. I have no problem with SOME cameras being hybrid video/stills. I am massively opposed to ALL stills cameras being stuffed with video sh*t.

And the video whiners shall f*cking go and buy f*cking video cams. Like this one here. Or any other, I don't care.
To paraphrase: "wa wa wah wah wah ... the world must revolve around me, me,me. go to he11 bad world"
 
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
149
#44
To paraphrase: "wa wa wah wah wah ... the world must revolve around me, me,me. go to he11 bad world"
no. it is just a very reasonable suggestion that imaging gear makers should offer products for majority markets (stills images) too, not only for tiny niches (hybrid video +stills). in their own best interest.

you can rest assured that it is not only me, but a vast majority of Canon imaging customers who only are interested in the best possible stills equipment and give a damn about capturing video.

camera phone snapshotters are a different kind. they mostly take cr*ppy snapshots and cr*poy snapshot videos too. it does not mean that people buying dedicated imaging gear also are equally hell-bent on stills + video capture.
 

Talys

Canon 6DII
Feb 16, 2017
1,878
122
Vancouver, BC
#45
you can rest assured that it is not only me, but a vast majority of Canon imaging customers who only are interested in the best possible stills equipment and give a damn about capturing video.
I'm one of the people who is totally uninterested in video on my stills camera. As I've said before, I don't mind all the video stuff, as long as it has no negatives from a stills perspective -- for example, I don't want to pay more, I don't want un-reprogrammable buttons that I'll never use that are in the way, and I certainly don't want an ergonomics penalty.

That said, if adding video capability can make my stills camera cheaper, I'm all for the cost savings as long as it's something I can effectively ignore.

I know that sounds a little counter-intuitive, but in the long run, it isn't really. A stills camera with video will have broader appeal, and if it increases the number of units sold, that will decrease the minimum price that Canon can sell the camera for and turn whatever profit it wants to make It also reduces the number of SKUs, which makes it easier on retailers to keep stock and all that.

At the end of the day, it will all come down to manufacturing price. If Canon can make the stills camera and add video functionality at no extra cost, and is willing to sell itat no extra premium, that's a win for everyone, I think.

There is also the possibility of video feature forcing my stills camera to a better stills camera; for example, if it forces Canon to move to UHS-II (for better write speed) or better DIGIC processor, that may then be snappier for stills photography.
 
Likes: pj1974
Apr 23, 2018
1,088
149
#46
@Talys - mostly in agreement, but got a somewhat different take on the following bullets:

1. any higher DIGIC performance is instantly gobbled up by and diverted off to video stuff (higher framerates, higher level codecs) and associated audio stuff instead of giving us e.g. even better and much more intelligent (stills) AF performance ... or IBIS ... or ... whatever other useful for stills capture items.

2. number of SKUs is evidently [FACT] of no concern to Canon (or Nikon) whatsoever.
* As long as they each are having far more than a dozen SKUs in the retail channel of current and last generations APS-C mirrorslappers in various "body-only" and "bundled with various kit lens/es".
* and for Canon even multiplied by 3 utterly unnecessary differently "continental"-branded SKUs: * Rebel / Kiss / xxxD * ... ffs!

So ... offering a few additional "uncompromised by video stuff, geared for best-possible stills performance camera" SKUs and at the same time cutting down all those "pure marketing sh*t SKUs" would actually lighten logistical efforts and cost of sales ... considerably.
:)
 
Last edited: