mat33

Yeah -hard to know if this was done on purpose in post, was shot in a high contrast standard colour mode or is a DR limitation in l-log, but the 120p looks pretty good and colours etc are pleasing

Been looking for some good footage from the SL including slow-mo and came across this. Shot on the SL apart from the drone shots (according to credits). Ahhh the 'I really need this camera' crazy rationalisation is nearly complete

@Andrew Reid Any chance you could upload a clip in 1080p with the standard picture profile and l-log? Would be interested to see how the 2016 firmware improved the l-log. Do you think dynamic range is any better?

Awesome -I've been thinking about trying to rationalise my cameras to better match what/how I'm shooting now and have been wanting to get a good hybrid for both stills and video so I can just take the one camera. I just don't gel with a sony, and want a full frame sensor for stills -so the SL looks mighty tempting especially being able to use m glass on it. I see it has 1.33:1; 1.66:1; 1.78:1; 1.85:1; 2.35:1; 2.4:1 aspect ratio guides - hallelujah. I see some have commented that the EVF is in the same class as the F55 or RED Bomb EVF -so that makes the price seem slightly better when you look at what they go for

@Andrew Reid how does the 1080p compare to the D750 or A7S?

I'm surprised the SL isn't getting more interest on here - imo is a pretty sexy looking camera.

This was recorded on the SL in 4K DCI L-log and a Pix-E5H recorder. The SL is an interesting beast if you want good video and stills. Only downsides I can see are $ and that if you want AF then the native lens are big and expensive. While its expensive, Lecia tend to hold their resale value so if you look at total cost of ownership, it may end not being too bad. I for one would much rather have the SL body only than a Sony + lens.

but but but but but this is NOT a low light camera...

All cameras are really like this, its just whether it happens at iso 800, 3200 or 500000 and how fast the IQ drop-off is. I guess I am willing to forgive some IQ issues at low light given the sensor size and the other positive features. You can argue that competitors can get better IQ at high iso from a 1 inch sensor but at the same time those competitors don't do other things as well as the XC10 -so you just have to pick your poison. It would be nice if you could turn off the NR completely as I like some grain but I suspect the NR is happening at least partially on the CMOS itself -which is another reason why CCD sensors rock.

I'm just playing devils advocate (and I don't like having to go to the gym...) I agree a C100 or C300 would be a much better choice if you are expecting low light shooting albeit a bigger, heavy package but if the shot was mainly in daylight then the XC10 is just fine.

I guess the counter real life argument is that because you are using the XC10 when your character starts running into the forest and cave, you are able to run to follow him/her as the form-factor and lens range mean you don't have a massive bag full of lenses, stabilisers and ND filters, and the great IS means your running shots are nice and stable. You then think wow I'm glad I had an XC10 on this documentary as if I was using X camera + add-on gear I would still be puffing up that hill at the start of the forrest and would never have reached the cave in time to get that once in a lifetime amazing shot...

Thats a fair point that other manufacturers have better sensor performance -but that is the case for a lot of Canons offerings. While pure sensor performance may not be as good, colour science and ergonomics make up for the sensor shortcomings for some.

I suspect no-one was troubled by the ghosting before because either a) no-one using it was using it as an A-cam for a paid, low light music/fashion video given the sensor size and the slow lens or b) any ghosting looked similar to motion blur and wasn't bothersome to most user/viewers. My guess is that Canon wanted to have good NR on the XC10 for lowlight documentary/news gathering etc and accepted some ghosting as a reasonable compromise. It may not be a compromise you are happy with but its not a critical flaw imo. My other camera is a D16 with similar sensor size but absolutely no NR happening in camera. With the D16 iso 800 is quite noisy but the noise is mainly luminance noise which I quite like -its very grain like. To someone else, the noise may be a deal breaker especially if they are comparing it something like an A7S. This doesn't mean the D16 has a critical flaw -its just one of the nuances of the camera that you either embrace and work with, or use a different camera. I do agree that sensor size has become too big of a deal. I think people often use sensor size as a way to show how pro you are rather than picking the sensor size for the aesthetic you want. I guess it comes back to film days -where s16 was seen by some as what you used only if you didn't have the budget for s35.

I know we are a distrustful bunch, but I can verify I do actually have an XC10, I'm not trying to sell it to you as a rare non-ghosting collectable safari edition, and my younger sister isn't pregnant which is why I'm risking my EosHD credibility and my promising career at dental school :-) I am just finishing an edit of something that should be suitable to post publicly, so I'll do that when I get a chance. Its nothing groundbreaking just a montage of some travel shots with the family but I was happy with the quality. I might even set my XC10 to iso20000 and wave it madly in front of a vase or similar to see if I do get any ghosting. I understand where you are coming from, and that you wish to make sure any prospective buyers don't just get the rose tinted view of the camera. I also appreciate the ghosting may be a show stopper for some. But my point is, which I think is valid and also important for prospective buyers to know, is that there are XC10 users out there who are happy with their cameras and that in their real world use aren't bothered by ghosting (regardless of whether their camera produces it or not). Nice vid by the way.

Overall I've been very happy with mine in the field -haven't seen any serious ghosting with higher iso's. I've found it to be very easy to use with nice IQ, and quite refreshing compared to a hybrid mirrorless where video is secondary to stills.

Is one of them a M9?

I usually shoot my D16 at iso 400 or 800 for the extra highlight range. There is more noise, but most of the noise is luminance noise which is quite film grain like (I think CCD noise is fairly random with no banding -like the Leica M9) and I find it quite pleasing especially if you have contrast in your lighting/shot. If there is any chroma noise, then neat video take cares of this very well and I usually turn off luma noise reduction all together.

Its amazing how the XC10 went from crap-what was Canon thinking, to the XC10 is amazing-how did the internets get this camera so wrong, back to the XC10 is crap-I won't ever believe what the internets tell me ever again. In reality, it has very nice IQ in good light, and better than expected IQ in low light given the sensor size and slow lens. IMO it makes up for any low light deficiencies with the form factor, c-log, lens range and great image stabilisation. If you use it for what is it intended and play to its strengths, its a nice compliment to a C100. Its not an A7S but then its probably not really fair to compare a 12 megapixel full frame sensor to a 12 megapixel 1 inch sensor for pure IQ in low light. In good light, I think it holds it own and is very very easy to match to other C cameras.

I haven't sold mine and don't plan to. For a grab and go camera I think its great. Does it have a few weaknesses -yes but hey all cameras do. For me its been great having a camera thats designed for video rather than stills first, and the IQ is pretty nice considering its a 1 inch sensor and the IS is really great. I haven't seen any issues with ghosting with mine (PAL version) but also haven't gone hunting for it as I'm happy with the end results. If a C100 form factor works for your type of shooting, then yes it will be better IQ wise given the s35 sensor, but the C100 is a different class of camera that the XC10 compliments rather than directly competes with. I have to say if the XC10 was the biggest bummer you had in 2016 then you did pretty well, considering the other clusterf**ks that happened around the world last year.....

The F3 is a great image for sure, but I'm not sure its entirely fair to judge the XC10 against it -they are quite different beasts with quite different uses. If you are dealing the the bulk and setup of an F3 for your work, then the XC10 is not the camera you should be getting.

Yeah -I suspect they used a cinema lens because it looks cool on the movi. And lets face it looks do matter -how many people have ended up giving in and buying a 'professional' looking camera to please/meet client expectations...

The video is a bit over the top and should be more balanced, but here is an article/interview from August with the filmmaker about the video he produced: http://www.digitaltrends.com/photography/scott-winn-canon-eos-80d/ Its actually reasonably balanced considering he is being paid by Canon for that piece. I think the 80D is just fine for many uses especially run and gun, and would be a good option for someone starting out . The IQ is meant to be better than prior canon dSLRs: 'Now to image quality. The 1080p of course could be better, this is Canon after all. But the skintones, colour science, codec, rolling shutter performance and low light are all very nice indeed - much better than most of the 4K cameras out there in fact and much better than Sony. The image upscales well to 4K on my LG DCI 4096 x 2160 display. In fact overall detail appears much higher than any Canon DSLR before it, way better than the 60D and 70D. It looks like the GH2 on many shots especially those at closer focus distances' 'The 60p seems as highly detailed as the 24p. Just a shame about the aliasing and the moire can still rear up and bite you, but overall the image is very satisfying when the conditions are right to use it. And if it means getting the shot vs not, then this justifies the 80D's existence.'

Looking forward to seeing your results John. I too think Olympus deserves more appreciation for their innovation of the years. I also love the ongoing support they give to their flagship camera. The E-M1 got a massive firmware update in 2015 -focus stacking, focus bracketing, silent electronic shutter, increase in shutter speed to 1/16000, adding 24/25p modes etc 2 years after it was released -most manufacturers (especially if they start with s and end with -ony) would have just released a new model. Will be good to see what they bring to the E-M1ii and future cameras now they are taking video more seriously.

Get a C100 and a XC10/15 for B cam (or low profile A cam if need to pack light) -very versatile set-up with minimal hassle and nice/easy colour match in post.

At least the content is clearly marked as being sponsored so you can identify it. All camera reviews should be taken in context, as everyone has some inherent biases. Even those who buy their own cameras will have the initial purchase buzz and the 'review' is actually be more of an initial impression which may not be updated once the 'reality' of a camera downsides or upsides become evident. It would be good if all camera reviews specified how long and in what context the camera was used i.e I have used the camera for 2 hours to shoot a street run&gun montage etc.