Canon Legria HF G70 Camcorder for Wildlife? NO. Repeat NO

 I gave my first impressions of the Canon Legria (Vixia in the US) HF G70 Camcorder in February 2023. I concentrated on image quality, noise with the small sensor and focusing. All I found to be very good. However, I realised on my first big trip with this camcorder that there were two serious flaws which made it completely unsuitable as a camera for filming wildlife. So serious did they turn out to be that I got rid of the camera—with curses sending it on its way.

Problem 1. Start-up Time

Having already decided I did not like the flimsy switch used to turn the camera on, I realised that it took an inordinate length of time for the camera to actually turn on and permit the record button to be pressed or to zoom the lens. A start-up screen even appeared saying nothing of any importance, reminiscent of those we had with mini-DV tape camcorders in the past. Out came the stopwatch: 8½ seconds. Enough time for bird to appear, bow three times and disappear over the horizon. By contrast my Nikon Z7 was timed at under 1½ seconds and my Sony RX10iv took under 4 seconds to turn on and to zoom to its longest focal length. I just wonder whether some old firmware Canon installed in camcorders in the past is still being used, leaving time for tape or hard drives to start-up.

Problem 2. Hand-held at long focal lengths

As I was zoomed into more distant animals I noticed a strange shimmer towards both sides of the image. I had read in the manual that at long focal lengths with DynamicIS (stabilisation) turned on ‘the edges of the picture may be adversely affected (ghosting, artifacts and/or dark areas may appear) when compensating for a high degree of camcorder shake)’. Had I accidentally left it on DynamicIS? No. It was happening with StandardIS. It was clearly an image stabilisation problem. With IS off the artifacts disappeared but then of course the image bounced around all over the place. Was it just me, not holding the thing still enough? To test that I asked people with much steadier hands than me to try it: the artifacts were still appearing. To cut a long story short, after much testing on my part at different focal lengths, the camcorder went back to Canon with sample video. They returned it saying there was nothing wrong!

Well, nothing wrong if you stick to wide-angle shots handheld and nothing wrong if you have it on a tripod. But lots wrong for handheld wildlife or even subjects like sports.

I concluded as it went out of the door that this was yet another camera designed for the convenience of the designer rather than the real needs of the people buying it. Something surely must have gone wrong with the design of the stabilisation system compared with other brands. Not only did Canon launch a camcorder with incorrect marketing information (that it has infrared capability), as I reported previously, but one that performed so miserably, both technically and ergonomically, in the field.

…The first thing I checked on the Sony RX10iv when it arrived was handheld video at 600 mm equivalent focal length on the optical zoom. Was there a problem à la Canon? No.