Review: Canon XC10 With Footage

I'm trying to hard to understand and like this camera, but I can't see any reason to buy this camera over the RX10. The RX10 outperforms the XC10 in almost every aspect and at a fraction of the price. The RX10 has a constant 2.8 lens vs the XC10's variable 2.8-5.6 lens. The RX10 is much smaller and better for drone work, it has better slow motion in 1080 and options for up to 960 fps and can capture 20MP RAW stills with bursts up to 14 fps.

The $1300 RX10 camera is clearly superior to the $2500 dollar XC10. To me, the XC10 is only worth 500-800 dollars. Even at that price, I still wouldn't buy it. I keep hoping that Canon would step up and compete, but I'm losing hope.
 
Upvote 0
RLPhoto said:
This camera should embarrass canon. Its 2,499$, does nothing more than the 649$ PZ1000 cam, costs as much as the A7s and almost the price of the A7rII, and has a fixed lens. I'd like to see this at 499$ where it belongs.
Yes, Canon XC10 is quite expensive, but we should not be simplistic to compare it to Panasonic FZ1000.

Canon XC10 records 4K with very high bitrate 305MB/S MPEG4, while Panasonic has FZ1000 bitrate is only 100MB/s

I believe XC10 is designed to record AND EDIT video 4K while maintaining decent quality while the cameras below $ 1000 will show significant quality losses during the editing 4K.
 
Upvote 0
Feb 12, 2014
873
23
KrisK said:
More YouTube footage. Not mine. High ISO samples starting at 2:25.

Not sure if anything meaningful can be gleaned, given it's, well, YouTube.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-M84vVDx4mU

The issue isn't YouTube, it appears to be the camera, or at least the edited material. The outdoor shots look unacceptably soft compared to 4K from other cameras. In fact, it looks worse than even HD from a decent modern camera, so I don't know.

There is a distressing amount of purple fringing going on around the backlit trees. That is what I hated about my G30, and it seems the XC10 has the same problem.
 
Upvote 0