oK wait?

[TimurCivan]

So.... for MSRP 5,199, (B&H) 4,999 for actual sale, the Xl2, Offers slightly brighter image performance, (from what i hear) a poorer looking 24P, a fantastic zoom range with poor wide angle. Now, CAnon was obiously trying to make the end all be all "Prosumer cam corder". Which seems to have the arbitrary price barrier of 5,000...... But in order to use a camera properly you need good wide angle ability as well. So in theory, they stick you with wha most likely will be a rarely used 20X zoom* (check the bottom), and a not so wide, wide angle* (Ctb) . meaning paying more for the additional lenses, cause some how i feel canon wouldnt build adapters if they could sell you a lense. Why do they hide it under the prosumer label, why not just say, hey its a low cost professional class camera. CAuse i would love to have the best image quality in the world, just like the next guy, but i wouldfeeel cheated ifi spent 5,000, then had to spend an additional 1,000(or however much a wideangle lense costs) just to be able to use it to its basic potential.

*Now 20x has its uses, dont get me wrong.... i actually just watched "death in Gaza" a documentary about this british video Journalist who was shot by Israeli soldiers and killed. He was rocking a lovely Xl1....... But i can see were 20X would be usefull, cause when a skirmish breaks out, being an additional block away makes all the difference.

* now about not so wide angle, Currently using a Sony DCR-TRV70. Great for a consumer cam, especailly in medim light, like daytime indoors. But, the damn thing at its widest setting in order to capture anythign you have to 25 feet away. I was covering The San Frincisco Carnaval parade, for a group Called Sambasia, these guys are a percussion group, with like 100 performers. In order to get the whole group in frame, i was literally a block away. and you can imagine what happenes to the sound even with a Condenser mic, wich was my poor attempt at being professional. haha... oh well they loved it anyway.

[Guest]

they make a wide angle adapter for all the XL lenses except the wide angle lens.

[TimurCivan]

k gotcha..... So then, do screw on W.A. Adaptors effect image quality, Aka reduce clarity, flaring, or anythign else? cause if it didint do any harm, it would be worth it to get one for my current camera.

[Guest]

I'm not sure. :-/

[TimurCivan]

because i mean i dont think anyone would put a quality reducing adaptor on a $2,000 gorgous lense. You know? im pretty sure they would replace it, other wise why but a camera with interchangable lenses. if you say cost, i then revamp my question of, is this thing really in the same class as a DVX, and can it be compared to it like wise. just from a cost factor standpoint. cause to use a DVX to its fullest t hink you need at least 3,000 worth of additional stuff. 16:9 anamporphic adaptor, steady cam devicethingie, good tripod, real nice computer + expensive editioing software, protective case (damn things are expensive), the list goes on. The XL2 is very heavy, and requires the very robust (aka expensive) versions of all thoes things , sans Editing computer and software and anamorphic adapter. Just a thought..... i dunno im havent had my hands on a dvx yet so........nor a xl1 or xl2, or anything better than a sony consumercam......

[Guest]

I'd wait for the new announcement by a major manufacturer if I were you... ;D

[Aaron Koolen]

Hehe, if you mean Sony, problem with them is that their cameras look like dog's turds, and I tend not like dog turds on my hands.