Matt Burton Posted September 20, 2005 Report Share Posted September 20, 2005 Must have missed this one! Why O Why did they make it the same shape as the XL2 ?????? Any thoughts ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Todd Ferguson Posted September 20, 2005 Report Share Posted September 20, 2005 Must have missed this one! Why O Why did they make it the same shape as the XL2 ?????? Any thoughts ? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Doe's this camera acctullay exist? And where has it been? Can the camera do 1080i/720p 24,25,60i? Any info available out there? Where was that photo taken from. Is it legit? I would like to know, Todd F. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Members Mikko Wilson Posted September 20, 2005 Premium Members Report Share Posted September 20, 2005 Ok.. I'v been following (and reporting) this story, so here's a breif breakdown: The camera was first shown as a mockup at IBC, and then released ofically at the Canon Expo in NY last week. As far as Steadicam operators care, it's the same as an XL2. (or basically an XL1) However it shoots HDV [MPEG2 25mbps] to tape. It uses the same lens mount, but of course requires HD lenses. The chips are interlaced only, and it shoots in 1080.. It'll do 60i,30f and 24f - the exact mening of "f" is yet to be cleared, basically it seems to capture progressive images with an interlaced CCD(?). With an optional upgrade it can become format agile (switchable between 60i and 50i (NTSC/PAL)) Here's the big ones: It has HD-SDI out, Genlock-in, and Timecode In and Out.. so some real professional studio connections there [and more cables for us] It will of course also do SD; DV to tape and SD-SDI out. You can take full control over the camera [read:paintbox] with a computer over firewire with special software. There is curently only one lense for it, but all the Mini35 stuff will still fit it and work with it. The camera costs $9000 and will ship by November. more details can be found at www.camcorderinfo.com - Mikko Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Burton Posted September 20, 2005 Author Report Share Posted September 20, 2005 Yo mikko to the rescue :P I'm personaly put off by the design, jvc got it right with the hd100 in putting a manual lens on as standerd. Whats the good of all that optical goodness if you you cant even zip zoom. Never mind doing anything freehand with that front heavy bugger. Plus with my XL2 all the safety covers fly around willy nilly and to be quite honest just look cheap. The amount of times i'v knocked the camera down to 1/25 of a sec shutter by acident is unreal, due to the shutter speed bieng in such an easly knocked possition (when shooting in manual). arrrgh aaargh aaargh I was realy hoping for something better from Canon, i dont want to buy a jvc but it looks like its winning the fight on design. any thoughts ? -Matt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Members Jason Torbitt Posted September 30, 2005 Premium Members Report Share Posted September 30, 2005 Plenty of info on this interesting looking new offering from Optex: http://www.optexint.com/xlh1/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Burton Posted September 30, 2005 Author Report Share Posted September 30, 2005 I'm puzeld about the 25f setting. Why are they saying 25f instead of 25p ? Or are they just dumbing down the lingo from progresive to frames. Also i'm failing to see what the point of hd sdi would be for apart from studio work. And to be honest if you have a studio why are you using a 1/3"" chip camera costing less than a bad night in vagas ? -matt Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Members Charles Papert Posted October 1, 2005 Premium Members Report Share Posted October 1, 2005 4mat, your points are well taken. I was disappointed when I first saw the pix of this camera--I've gone from being a big Canon fan (had an Xl1 and then an XL1s) to a bit disillusioned of late. The form factor and design has a lot to do with this. Canon is determined to keep the shape the same as the camera that (rightly so) made them so big in the DV world, but I feel it's time to move on. It's very hard to accessorize these cameras because of the weird shaped back and rear connectors--having outboard spacers and whatnot hanging off the rear always felt like a hack job to me. I had a vision when the XL2 came out of a "pro back" that was matched in color and material and essentially snapped on to the backside like one of those docking stations for a laptop; relocating the connectors to the side panels and offering a nice flat back end for Anton Bauer or other battery types, perhaps a slot or mounting possibilities for wireless mikes etc. Thus the classic XL form could have been maintained but those looking for more could buy the "pro back" to create a seamless-looking larger camera (and guess what, that would have also made it properly shoulder-mountable AND less front heavy). But no, who listens to me...! The JVC HD100, in comparison, feels much more like a pro camera and has the controls in a fashion dictated more by logic than by a need to be "different" or sexy or whatever Canon is going after. The 24f designation has to do with Canon working a way around the HDV standard which doesn't nominally include 24p (JVC created their own variation with PROHD), so that by flagging frames and reconstructing on output a simulation of 24p is achieved. Early reports feel that it is really 24p by a different name rather than the CF 24 Sony debacle or even the early Canon frame mode 30p simulation. Bop on over to another haunt of Mikko and mine, the DVinfo.net, for all sorts of info on this camera. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.