Canon XA50

[mat33]

Anyone interested in one of these? -like a XC15 with better form factor and DPAF but worse codecs. I'm quite tempted, would be nice to go back to a camcorder form factor.

[mercer]

Yeah I would love a camcorder again. I’ve had a found footage movie idea forever that it would be perfect for... but the price. With the 10bit 1080p out... a Ninja Star or even a BMVA could be a nice little set up. The XA55 even has SDI. But again, the price.

[webrunner5]

Yeah 8 bit and weak Codecs, not counting a left handed joystick, 80% DPAF coverage for that money, hmm. I guess it is nice to have a pick it up and go form factor but..

The Sony PXW-Z90V 4K HDR XDCAM does 10bit 4.2.2. Seems a better deal to me. I don't need 4K, so a Canon C100 mk II or a C300 seems more my style for nearly the same money. It depends what you are going to use it for though for sure.

[Cinegain]

I was pretty amazed with what their XF705 was capable of... https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/products/details/camcorders/professional/xf705 | https://www.usa.canon.com/internet/portal/us/home/about/newsroom/press-releases/press-release-details/2018/20180912-camcorder/20180912-camcorder, 'features 4K (3840 x 2160) video shooting enabling users to record high-image quality at 60p/4:2:2/10-bit/HDR1 video to on-board SD cards', 'slow motion recording up to 120fps in Full HD', 'easily choose between two HDR formats—Hybrid Log-Gamma (HLG), ideal for such scenarios as broadcasting and live video transmission and Perceptual Quantization (PQ), which is well-suited during web transmission and film production', 'Live IP Streaming capability', 'features Canon’s newly developed XF-HEVC video format that enables users to record HDR video to SD cards while delivering a high compression ratio. It also allows HDR (internal SD card) and SDR (external recorder) simultaneous recording', '(first Canon camcorder to adopt the H.265/HEVC codec)', 'featuring Canon’s revolutionary Dual Pixel CMOS AF', 'Canon Log 3, 12G-SDI, Built-in Wi-Fi, 4-channel audio, 3 density ND filter and 5 axis image stabilization for its 15x optical zoom lens', 'adjustable 4.0-inch touch panel LCD monitor and a built-in 0.46-inch electronic viewfinder'... of course then you read: 'suggested retail price of $6,999.00'. Ouch. I knew it had to hurt somewhere.

But it goes to show there's not a complete lack of innovation over at Canon. Like... they could implement cool features and tech into more cameras... if they actually wanted to. Just... 99% of the time they don't want you to have it. 'Pay peanuts, get monkeys'-sorta approach. They don't lack innovation, they lack the motivation to put it into more cameras. They rather re-package a DSLR as a mirrorless camera and vice versa and call it a day; less effort. I perhaps would do the same if idiots kept buying into that strategy... ugh. Wish someone would make a proper follow-up to the JVC GY-LS300 already. Wish Canon would follow Panasonic's and Sony's way of pushing tech and competitive pricing. An attractively priced XC15 with interchangeable lens mount and XF705 kind of features would be pretty sick.

[BTM_Pix]

If you are looking at a 1" camcorder then I'd pause for a few weeks to see some output from the JVC HC500.

Its a lot more expensive but it has a massive spec including ProRes internal and even has a slot to record straight to SSD

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1438286-REG/jvc_gy_hc500_connected_cam_4k_professional.html

////EDIT////

Whoah the HC500 is FAR more expensive than I thought so maybe scratch that!!

////EDIT////

I have to say though that if you pick up an LS300 and pair it with something like the Tamron 16-300mm with a smart adapter then you've actually got a de-facto camcorder with a much bigger sensor for a similar if not cheaper price with all the expansion advantages if you need it.

The addition of the Ninja V to the LS300 transforms it in terms of monitoring and recording options.

 

[Kisaha]

XC15 ergonomics (with a little improvement) are excellent in my opinion and a good basis for a killer small video camera. 

A cheap-ish one (2-3000$ in Canon money) with EF-M (and adapted EF-S) lenses would be amazing and a sure hit for events, weddings, documentaries e.t.c In this price range cheap lenses are an advantage also.

Of course if Canon can sell you such a camera 4 times the size - 4 times the weight and 4 times the price - throwing there a raw lite cheese, in the form of C200, then why bother??!!

One of the disadvantages of the LS300 was exactly the classic-y video handycam form factor, which isn't suitable for handheld use like the XC/C100/FS5 are, and not cinema style either.

In my opinion that is the issue with the P4K too. It is a video camera mimicking a classic photo camera. Why?!

The LS300 is still a great value for money option of course.

 

[kye]

17 minutes ago, Kisaha said:

XC15 ergonomics (with a little improvement) are excellent in my opinion and a good basis for a killer small video camera. 

My XC10 was great in every way except I needed faster lenses for shallow DoF and low-light performance.  Ergonomics are spectacular.  

[webrunner5]

No DPAF, even on the XC15 is a bummer though. Why the hell would you put DPAF on the M50 and not on the XC15 lol. Crazy company.

[mat33]

The XC10/15 were ok - but didn't like the lack of a dedicated viewfinder as mucking around with the loupe meant I basically never used it. Having better AF would be nice, and doing a smooth zoom in/out using the rockers would be nice - nothing says cinematic mojo like a good old zoom in/out ?

 

[mercer]

43 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

No DPAF, even on the XC15 is a bummer though. Why the hell would you put DPAF on the M50 and not on the XC15 lol. Crazy company.

Because the M50 was released 2 years after the XC15. 

[webrunner5]

8 minutes ago, mercer said:

Because the M50 was released 2 years after the XC15. 

Yeah but a C100, C300 has had DPAF forever.

[mercer]

2 hours ago, Cinegain said:

They rather re-package a DSLR as a mirrorless camera and vice versa and call it a day; less effort. I perhaps would do the same if idiots kept buying into that strategy... ugh. Wish someone would make a proper follow-up to the JVC GY-LS300 already. Wish Canon would follow Panasonic's and Sony's way of pushing tech and competitive pricing. An attractively priced XC15 with interchangeable lens mount and XF705 kind of features would be pretty sick.

I’m sorry but this just isn’t exactly true. Other than the 4K crop, the EOS-R has a lot of video features inside of it, including the highest bitrate, all-i video of any FF mirrorless camera. Sony is still using their paltry 100mbps codec. And unless you get the flagship m4/3 camera from Panasonic, you’re not getting much more in their $1000 camera as you do with their $500 camera.

All of these companies suck.

2 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

Yeah but a C100 has had DPAF forever.

I’m not saying Canon makes sense with their choices, I’m just saying you can’t compare features from cameras that are 2-3 years apart. 

Canon has segmentation down to a science. They know exactly which users will buy what cameras and what features they really need.

It’s just people like us that want everything from a $500 camera because other companies are trying to sell TVs. The early adoption of 4K will stagnate camera development for the next year. Hell, Sony hasn’t released an a7siii because they don’t know what to include in the damn thing that makes sense any more. It used to be that if they could add a few frames in burst mode and an extra half a stop in ISO performance, it was a decent model upgrade... now we’re actually discussing Panasonic and Sony offering 8K when they haven’t even given us great 1080p in their base models.

You can only use one division of your company to prop up another division for so long. Hopefully, they really don’t believe that they have to jump to 8K video in the next evolution.

[newfoundmass]

If you're looking for the best value you can't beat Sony, whether it's their handy cams or their professional camcorders. As someone that has done live event videography for the last 20 years I've always preferred them to Canon, especially because they've generally had superior low light performance which was always important when you had little, if any, control over lighting. 

I'd prefer the PXW-X70 with 4K over the XA40. 

I've been intrigued too by the JVC offerings, especially given how much I love the LS300. Cameras like the GY-HM170UA looks like a pretty good bargain and has a lot of the features that the LS300 has. I wish they'd bring their menu system into the 2010s, or even the 2000s, though! ?

[kye]

1 hour ago, newfoundmass said:

If you're looking for the best value you can't beat Sony

It depends on what you value, as different people prioritise things very differently to each other.

It might be that when you look at what Sony provide and compare that to what you value there is a strong match.  That strong match will likely not be the same for the next person who shoots different films in different situations with a different style, edits and grades them in different software on different hardware, likes a different final look, and all the time is using their eyes that see framing, DR, colour, resolution, sharpness, and contrast differently to the way your eyes do.

[Mokara]

6 hours ago, mercer said:

I’m sorry but this just isn’t exactly true. Other than the 4K crop, the EOS-R has a lot of video features inside of it, including the highest bitrate, all-i video of any FF mirrorless camera. Sony is still using their paltry 100mbps codec. And unless you get the flagship m4/3 camera from Panasonic, you’re not getting much more in their $1000 camera as you do with their $500 camera.

Not all encoders are the same. Although they may produce encoded data using the same format, the algorithms used to arrive at that format are proprietary. Some may dump more information but still need a high bit rate, so you can't judge different cameras solely on the bit rate used. The quality of the final output depends on exactly what parts of the image are being sacrificed to fit into the bandwidth. If your encoder can't make that judgement efficiently and accurately enough, it has to rely on high bit rates to get the same visual quality. For example, if your encoder can't tell the difference between an area with fine detail and an area with no detail, it has use extra bandwidth to cover both to avoid losing something important in the image. An encoder which can tell the difference will use more bandwidth for the fine detail and less for the no detail, which equates to fewer mbps required overall.

[webrunner5]

18 hours ago, Mokara said:

Not all encoders are the same. Although they may produce encoded data using the same format, the algorithms used to arrive at that format are proprietary. Some may dump more information but still need a high bit rate, so you can't judge different cameras solely on the bit rate used. The quality of the final output depends on exactly what parts of the image are being sacrificed to fit into the bandwidth. If your encoder can't make that judgement efficiently and accurately enough, it has to rely on high bit rates to get the same visual quality. For example, if your encoder can't tell the difference between an area with fine detail and an area with no detail, it has use extra bandwidth to cover both to avoid losing something important in the image. An encoder which can tell the difference will use more bandwidth for the fine detail and less for the no detail, which equates to fewer mbps required overall.

?

[Mokara]

12 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

?

You think that everyone uses the same encoder? lol....

[webrunner5]

No, I think you are sort of sketchy on your analysis lol. I remember when I was in College and we had to take what they called unannounced "Blue Book" tests. If you wrote a bunch of rambling shit it really meant you really didn't know the answer to the question very well, or at all. It just brought back old memories is all. At least it made me smile. Thanks. ?

And yeah I agree that they probably all use Different Encoders. Pretty much different everything's to be honest, even designs on another makers Sensor even, using some of their own secret sauce as they say.  I doubt anyone of the big boys is just using off the shelf stuff with no modifications. If not the case all cameras would look alike, and none do. if you have weak processors you can't even take full advantage of what is even available on the sensor. So Tons of variables from each manufacturer which is probably a good thing than a worse thing..