Canon U.S.A. Introduces New VIXIA HF G40 And Three New VIXIA HF R-Series Camcorders

[msm]

...
Canon certainly still has technological leadership in AF systems, lens design, and a whole number of other key areas, so IDK WTF you're going on about...
...

Yeah shure just compare this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQ4rEvbCNuw

to this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efAQI4CbS5s

Technology leadership indeed! :

 

[neuroanatomist]

that is what 1D-X users believe. If you read reviews, it is clear that Nikon's more recent AF implementations (e.g. D810, D750) are superior - especially in acquiring and tracking moving subjects with the help of color information.

A few weeks ago a friend and I swapped rigs for part of a birding shoot (eagles and owls) – his D810 and 800/5.6 for my 1D X and 600/4 II + 1.4x. While both bodies did an excellent job at initial acquisition (both of brown eagles against a green background and snowy owls against snow), we agreed that the 1D X did better at maintaining the lock (even with the TC).

Of course, that's an actual use comparison and not an Internet review. If I fed my family by click-revenue I generated by posting reviews on the Internet, I bet I'd conclude the newer cameras were better. Tony Northrup's 'sports test' where the model walked sedately toward him and he found the D810 focused better than a 5DIII using AF settings that Canon recommends against using for moving subjects, for example.

Incidentally, the Nikon 800/5.6 is really a fantastic lens (and how innovative of Nikon to use fluorite in it!).

 

[Mt Spokane Photography]

1080p? What is this 2008? I can record better video on my phone.

Personally, I'll take clean 1080p over grainy 4K – sensor size matters. Besides, haven't you heard? 4K is already dead, we're on to 8K now...

I can see some use for 8K, since the screen grabs will have enough mp tp crop and print a sharp image. 4K is borderline, good for web sized images.

 

[neuroanatomist]

1080p? What is this 2008? I can record better video on my phone.

Personally, I'll take clean 1080p over grainy 4K – sensor size matters. Besides, haven't you heard? 4K is already dead, we're on to 8K now...

I can see some use for 8K, since the screen grabs will have enough mp tp crop and print a sharp image. 4K is borderline, good for web sized images.

True...but then there's the issue of video frame rates chosen for smooth motion and pleasing video often show subject motion blur in still frame grabs.

 

[msm]

that is what 1D-X users believe. If you read reviews, it is clear that Nikon's more recent AF implementations (e.g. D810, D750) are superior - especially in acquiring and tracking moving subjects with the help of color information.

A few weeks ago a friend and I swapped rigs for part of a birding shoot (eagles and owls) – his D810 and 800/5.6 for my 1D X and 600/4 II + 1.4x. While both bodies did an excellent job at initial acquisition (both of brown eagles against a green background and snowy owls against snow), we agreed that the 1D X did better at maintaining the lock (even with the TC).

Nice anecdote. How about you actually do some repeatable testing where you take out all the random crap like how subject moves, how well the photographer is able to keep focus points on right spot on the subject and light conditions, and perform the test repeatedly over a variation in all relevant autofocus parameters. Then your opinion could actually hold some weight instead of being considered the usual worthless internet garbage.

 

[bdunbar79]

that is what 1D-X users believe. If you read reviews, it is clear that Nikon's more recent AF implementations (e.g. D810, D750) are superior - especially in acquiring and tracking moving subjects with the help of color information.

A few weeks ago a friend and I swapped rigs for part of a birding shoot (eagles and owls) – his D810 and 800/5.6 for my 1D X and 600/4 II + 1.4x. While both bodies did an excellent job at initial acquisition (both of brown eagles against a green background and snowy owls against snow), we agreed that the 1D X did better at maintaining the lock (even with the TC).

Nice anecdote. How about you actually do some repeatable testing where you take out all the random crap like how subject moves, how well the photographer is able to keep focus points on right spot on the subject and light conditions, and perform the test repeatedly over a variation in all relevant autofocus parameters. Then your opinion could actually hold some weight instead of being considered the usual worthless internet garbage.

You mean like Tony Nothrup's conclusion that the D810 was a better sports camera than the 5D3? Tests like that? I'm sure that test took into consideration, whole-heartedly, the considerations you mention.

 

[Maui5150]

1080p? What is this 2008? I can record better video on my phone.

Clearly an outdated press release that got sent out by accident by Canon, no one uses camcorders anymore.

I have actually been looking for a nice cheap camcorder. I have been starting to shoot a lot more video and looking for a nice built in lens, decent continuous AF system, nice zoom range, and built in XLR

I lean towards a lot more of the entry level pro gear, just not the price.

 

[bdunbar79]

Canon certainly still has technological leadership in AF systems,

that is what 1D-X users believe. If you read reviews, it is clear that Nikon's more recent AF implementations (e.g. D810, D750) are superior - especially in acquiring and tracking moving subjects with the help of color information. If you look at the 5D / D500 specs I fully expect them to trounce any AF system Canon has brouight to market until today and I do NOT expect Canon to best the D5 with the 1DX-2 or the 5D 4.

But we are getting off topic here. On topic: I consider it a shame for a company like Canon to present the procudts - all of them! - they have been presenting at CES 2016.

What a complete load of BS. I shoot 4-5 sports events/week with a 1Dx and I can tell you that isn't true at all. That and the fact you do not understand AF specs. Nikon's AF system is not superior to Canon's. The D5 specification list, if you know what you are talking about (you don't) doesn't even match the 1Dx's precision. And that's not really up for debate; that's factual.

 

[msm]

that is what 1D-X users believe. If you read reviews, it is clear that Nikon's more recent AF implementations (e.g. D810, D750) are superior - especially in acquiring and tracking moving subjects with the help of color information.

A few weeks ago a friend and I swapped rigs for part of a birding shoot (eagles and owls) – his D810 and 800/5.6 for my 1D X and 600/4 II + 1.4x. While both bodies did an excellent job at initial acquisition (both of brown eagles against a green background and snowy owls against snow), we agreed that the 1D X did better at maintaining the lock (even with the TC).

Nice anecdote. How about you actually do some repeatable testing where you take out all the random crap like how subject moves, how well the photographer is able to keep focus points on right spot on the subject and light conditions, and perform the test repeatedly over a variation in all relevant autofocus parameters. Then your opinion could actually hold some weight instead of being considered the usual worthless internet garbage.

You mean like Tony Nothrup's conclusion that the D810 was a better sports camera than the 5D3? Tests like that? I'm sure that test took into consideration, whole-heartedly, the considerations you mention.

Got anything better to contribute than some lame strawman argument? If not it is better to not post at all.

 

[msm]

Canon certainly still has technological leadership in AF systems,

that is what 1D-X users believe. If you read reviews, it is clear that Nikon's more recent AF implementations (e.g. D810, D750) are superior - especially in acquiring and tracking moving subjects with the help of color information. If you look at the 5D / D500 specs I fully expect them to trounce any AF system Canon has brouight to market until today and I do NOT expect Canon to best the D5 with the 1DX-2 or the 5D 4.

But we are getting off topic here. On topic: I consider it a shame for a company like Canon to present the procudts - all of them! - they have been presenting at CES 2016.

What a complete load of BS. I shoot 4-5 sports events/week with a 1Dx and I can tell you that isn't true at all. That and the fact you do not understand AF specs. Nikon's AF system is not superior to Canon's. The D5 specification list, if you know what you are talking about (you don't) doesn't even match the 1Dx's precision. And that's not really up for debate; that's factual.

You speak from your vast experience shooting 1Dx and D5 side by side I presume? :

 

[bdunbar79]

they don't care. it is evident. Something has happened to Canon about 9 years ago, when they lost their former technological leadership in image sensors, AF-systems and a whole number of other key areas. They just lost their edge and have not done anything to gain it back.

Who innovated color information for AF tracking? Not Nikon. Can you guess who?

Boy they sure lost their edge huh? Trouncing Nikon in sales? Ouch, that hurts!

You need to move out of your parents' basement dude. Seriously.

 

[bdunbar79]

Canon certainly still has technological leadership in AF systems,

that is what 1D-X users believe. If you read reviews, it is clear that Nikon's more recent AF implementations (e.g. D810, D750) are superior - especially in acquiring and tracking moving subjects with the help of color information. If you look at the 5D / D500 specs I fully expect them to trounce any AF system Canon has brouight to market until today and I do NOT expect Canon to best the D5 with the 1DX-2 or the 5D 4.

But we are getting off topic here. On topic: I consider it a shame for a company like Canon to present the procudts - all of them! - they have been presenting at CES 2016.

What a complete load of BS. I shoot 4-5 sports events/week with a 1Dx and I can tell you that isn't true at all. That and the fact you do not understand AF specs. Nikon's AF system is not superior to Canon's. The D5 specification list, if you know what you are talking about (you don't) doesn't even match the 1Dx's precision. And that's not really up for debate; that's factual.

You speak from your vast experience shooting 1Dx and D5 side by side I presume? :

You don't shoot with either. Right?

No, you just read inerrrrrnet reviews. Plus, the D5's AF sensors still aren't as high precision as Canon's. Do you understand that? Canon's latest AF system also uses color information (like 4 years ago).

Pretty much ends the AF discussion.

 

[scyrene]

that is what 1D-X users believe. If you read reviews, it is clear that Nikon's more recent AF implementations (e.g. D810, D750) are superior - especially in acquiring and tracking moving subjects with the help of color information.

A few weeks ago a friend and I swapped rigs for part of a birding shoot (eagles and owls) – his D810 and 800/5.6 for my 1D X and 600/4 II + 1.4x. While both bodies did an excellent job at initial acquisition (both of brown eagles against a green background and snowy owls against snow), we agreed that the 1D X did better at maintaining the lock (even with the TC).

Nice anecdote. How about you actually do some repeatable testing where you take out all the random crap like how subject moves, how well the photographer is able to keep focus points on right spot on the subject and light conditions, and perform the test repeatedly over a variation in all relevant autofocus parameters. Then your opinion could actually hold some weight instead of being considered the usual worthless internet garbage.

You mean like Tony Nothrup's conclusion that the D810 was a better sports camera than the 5D3? Tests like that? I'm sure that test took into consideration, whole-heartedly, the considerations you mention.

Got anything better to contribute than some lame strawman argument? If not it is better to not post at all.

Neuro's anecdote is worth more than the vague 'X is better than Y' it was countering, which offered no supporting evidence. Rigorous, controlled tests are much better of course, but nobody is arguing against that. Can you point us to some?

 

[msm]

Canon certainly still has technological leadership in AF systems,

that is what 1D-X users believe. If you read reviews, it is clear that Nikon's more recent AF implementations (e.g. D810, D750) are superior - especially in acquiring and tracking moving subjects with the help of color information. If you look at the 5D / D500 specs I fully expect them to trounce any AF system Canon has brouight to market until today and I do NOT expect Canon to best the D5 with the 1DX-2 or the 5D 4.

But we are getting off topic here. On topic: I consider it a shame for a company like Canon to present the procudts - all of them! - they have been presenting at CES 2016.

What a complete load of BS. I shoot 4-5 sports events/week with a 1Dx and I can tell you that isn't true at all. That and the fact you do not understand AF specs. Nikon's AF system is not superior to Canon's. The D5 specification list, if you know what you are talking about (you don't) doesn't even match the 1Dx's precision. And that's not really up for debate; that's factual.

You speak from your vast experience shooting 1Dx and D5 side by side I presume? :

You don't shoot with either. Right?

Wrong. I don't care which one is the "best" either, the D5 does not have anything that would make me switch anyways. But I have trouble keeping quiet when the internet "experts" come here making bold claims based on a spec sheet.

 

[bdunbar79]

No! The spec sheet says so! Oh wait, no it doesn't! Shoot!

 

[bdunbar79]

Canon certainly still has technological leadership in AF systems,

that is what 1D-X users believe. If you read reviews, it is clear that Nikon's more recent AF implementations (e.g. D810, D750) are superior - especially in acquiring and tracking moving subjects with the help of color information. If you look at the 5D / D500 specs I fully expect them to trounce any AF system Canon has brouight to market until today and I do NOT expect Canon to best the D5 with the 1DX-2 or the 5D 4.

But we are getting off topic here. On topic: I consider it a shame for a company like Canon to present the procudts - all of them! - they have been presenting at CES 2016.

What a complete load of BS. I shoot 4-5 sports events/week with a 1Dx and I can tell you that isn't true at all. That and the fact you do not understand AF specs. Nikon's AF system is not superior to Canon's. The D5 specification list, if you know what you are talking about (you don't) doesn't even match the 1Dx's precision. And that's not really up for debate; that's factual.

You speak from your vast experience shooting 1Dx and D5 side by side I presume? :

You don't shoot with either. Right?

Wrong. I don't care which one is the "best" either, the D5 does not have anything that would make me switch anyways. But I have trouble keeping quiet when the internet "experts" come here making bold claims based on a spec sheet.

It's not hard to point out that 1. Canon's AF system has used color information for 4 years and 2. The AF points on the D5 aren't as high precision as that on the 1Dx.

Those are facts. They're not bold "claims", they are facts.

 

[msm]

that is what 1D-X users believe. If you read reviews, it is clear that Nikon's more recent AF implementations (e.g. D810, D750) are superior - especially in acquiring and tracking moving subjects with the help of color information.

A few weeks ago a friend and I swapped rigs for part of a birding shoot (eagles and owls) – his D810 and 800/5.6 for my 1D X and 600/4 II + 1.4x. While both bodies did an excellent job at initial acquisition (both of brown eagles against a green background and snowy owls against snow), we agreed that the 1D X did better at maintaining the lock (even with the TC).

Nice anecdote. How about you actually do some repeatable testing where you take out all the random crap like how subject moves, how well the photographer is able to keep focus points on right spot on the subject and light conditions, and perform the test repeatedly over a variation in all relevant autofocus parameters. Then your opinion could actually hold some weight instead of being considered the usual worthless internet garbage.

You mean like Tony Nothrup's conclusion that the D810 was a better sports camera than the 5D3? Tests like that? I'm sure that test took into consideration, whole-heartedly, the considerations you mention.

Got anything better to contribute than some lame strawman argument? If not it is better to not post at all.

Neuro's anecdote is worth more than the vague 'X is better than Y' it was countering, which offered no supporting evidence. Rigorous, controlled tests are much better of course, but nobody is arguing against that. Can you point us to some?

For distance tracking, ie photographer keeping a focus point on the subject then I have not seen any proper controlled tests. I would love to see it if someone has done it however. In the absence of such test, arguing that system X is better than system Y has no value.

When it comes to subject tracking DPReviews videos clearly demonstrate that Canon is far behind as it is almost useless while on Nikon or Sony it can actually be useful and more practical than manually changing focus point.

 

[bdunbar79]

Plus, interesting that all the spec sheet people on here using spec sheets against all the Canon gear (no real life experiences) think it's okay in that case. However, when someone uses spec sheets against the Sonikon gear, than it's just using spec sheets and doesn't count.

Canon's best AF system still has higher precision points than Nikon's best AF system. I don't give a crap which is better either, but when AvTvM makes such asinine claims that he has, where were YOU then? Why aren't you correcting him? He is so far off base it's not even funny, yet you ignore him because he supports your obviously biased claims. Some of his claims are actually flat out WRONG. The topper is the use of color information. That whole sentence about color info is just wrong. How hypocritical (and typical).

In the end it doesn't matter. The 1Dx II is going to whoop the D5, just like the 1Dx whooped the D4. It'll be no contest again.

 

[msm]

Canon certainly still has technological leadership in AF systems,

that is what 1D-X users believe. If you read reviews, it is clear that Nikon's more recent AF implementations (e.g. D810, D750) are superior - especially in acquiring and tracking moving subjects with the help of color information. If you look at the 5D / D500 specs I fully expect them to trounce any AF system Canon has brouight to market until today and I do NOT expect Canon to best the D5 with the 1DX-2 or the 5D 4.

But we are getting off topic here. On topic: I consider it a shame for a company like Canon to present the procudts - all of them! - they have been presenting at CES 2016.

What a complete load of BS. I shoot 4-5 sports events/week with a 1Dx and I can tell you that isn't true at all. That and the fact you do not understand AF specs. Nikon's AF system is not superior to Canon's. The D5 specification list, if you know what you are talking about (you don't) doesn't even match the 1Dx's precision. And that's not really up for debate; that's factual.

You speak from your vast experience shooting 1Dx and D5 side by side I presume? :

You don't shoot with either. Right?

Wrong. I don't care which one is the "best" either, the D5 does not have anything that would make me switch anyways. But I have trouble keeping quiet when the internet "experts" come here making bold claims based on a spec sheet.

It's not hard to point out that 1. Canon's AF system has used color information for 4 years and 2. The AF points on the D5 aren't as high precision as that on the 1Dx.

Those are facts. They're not bold "claims", they are facts.

Really? Facts based what? A spec sheet? Who cares about testing real world performance, we got a spec sheet! :

 

[bdunbar79]

that is what 1D-X users believe. If you read reviews, it is clear that Nikon's more recent AF implementations (e.g. D810, D750) are superior - especially in acquiring and tracking moving subjects with the help of color information.

A few weeks ago a friend and I swapped rigs for part of a birding shoot (eagles and owls) – his D810 and 800/5.6 for my 1D X and 600/4 II + 1.4x. While both bodies did an excellent job at initial acquisition (both of brown eagles against a green background and snowy owls against snow), we agreed that the 1D X did better at maintaining the lock (even with the TC).

Nice anecdote. How about you actually do some repeatable testing where you take out all the random crap like how subject moves, how well the photographer is able to keep focus points on right spot on the subject and light conditions, and perform the test repeatedly over a variation in all relevant autofocus parameters. Then your opinion could actually hold some weight instead of being considered the usual worthless internet garbage.

You mean like Tony Nothrup's conclusion that the D810 was a better sports camera than the 5D3? Tests like that? I'm sure that test took into consideration, whole-heartedly, the considerations you mention.

Got anything better to contribute than some lame strawman argument? If not it is better to not post at all.

Neuro's anecdote is worth more than the vague 'X is better than Y' it was countering, which offered no supporting evidence. Rigorous, controlled tests are much better of course, but nobody is arguing against that. Can you point us to some?

For distance tracking, ie photographer keeping a focus point on the subject then I have not seen any proper controlled tests. I would love to see it if someone has done it however. In the absence of such test, arguing that system X is better than system Y has no value.

When it comes to subject tracking DPReviews videos clearly demonstrate that Canon is far behind as it is almost useless while on Nikon or Sony it can actually be useful and more practical than manually changing focus point.

Wrong again. If you set it up properly, the 1Dx auto-switch point for tracking works just fine. I know because I do it. But hey, you watched a video, so that must be better! The internet said so!