My theory on the XL H1 Price

[stephenvv]

I'm pretty convinced that the H1 price is vastly inflated, my guess $2 - $3k at least.

Why, one word - XL2. Canon felt it had to have an "HD" product. But if they released a HDV product anywhere near the XL2 price point. XL2 sales die immediately and lots of unhappy XL2 owners.

I don't buy the fact that a HD-SDI jack and the Flourite L glass (BTW, the GL1 - GL2 have that glass) doubled the price of the cam.

I think it's marketing completely. I'm sure the Lens is better, but my guess is it's about $1000 better at most. Plus $250 -$500 for SDI jack, DSP, processer.

My guess if no XL2 existed, this would hit the market at $6995. Of course, I can be proved wrong when the cam ships and someone does a lens chart test using the XL2 lens vs. HL lens.:embarasse

But the speed (for Canon) that this arrived to market tells me this is camera starting during the XL2 development when Canon realized the HD/DDV was a big thing, but did not want to stop XL2 plans. I would suprised if the parts are not 90% identical.

[TheGSpot]

The Panasonic AJ-HD1200A (VTR DECK) is 21 grand alone.. to have an HD SDI input on it, you have to drop another 6 grand into it. so i think its justifiable to have it on the H1 at 9 grand.

[stephenvv]

The Panasonic AJ-HD1200A (VTR DECK) is 21 grand alone.. to have an HD SDI input on it, you have to drop another 6 grand into it. so i think its justifiable to have it on the H1 at 9 grand.

SDI Input is a different beast from SDI Output...I'm no camera engineer but the HD-SDI output on the HL should simply be a chip plus a jack. HD SDI Input involved much more componentry, buffers, conversions in order to record the signal (analogous to the money you have to spend to record HD-SDI). It's even possible the conversion of the signal to HD SDI is done on the DIGIC II chip.

[Zim]

B &H has the XL2 for $3999. So dropping the new cam to $6,000 would be good.

[TheGSpot]

What i wanna know is when are they gonna bring out the manual lens and body only.. that'll knock down the price a bit

[nateweaver]

I think that manual lens is going to be $4-5000.

The electronics and mechanicals in the auto lens are relatively cheap, compared to the short manufacturing run, metal fabrication, and mechanical precision needed in a manual lens. It's the glass that costs the bulk of the money anyway.

[TheGSpot]

Manual lens will be cheaper.. relatively, cause the lens wont have "image stablizer" and it wont be 20x zoom lens.. so less glass, the only reason it'll likely cost more.. is cause its "HD" and anything with that acronym on that lens.. cost more.. CURSE YOU HD and theres no F-Stop control on the lens itself so again. cheaper.. wish it did tough.

[thisiswells]

Usually manual zoom lenses need twice the number of moving parts and glass elements as vari-focal lenses -- they are generally more costly because of that. Image stablizers exist as an offshoot of making a cheap electronically controlled lens -- they're not really an added feature more than they are a necessary feature.

[AshG]

Street on the XL2 is $3699, XLH $8999. Street for the DVX100b is $3299, HVX $5999. By your very same logic, shouldnt there be a bunch of disgruntled DVX owners? if the XLH is $2000 inflated that makes it $6999 but according to you that would make XL2 owners mad? Your logic makes no sense at all. These cameras are not targeted at the same audience.

The RUDE awakening to many will be the sluggishness and compatability issues they will have while trying to go HD. It requires a significant investment in post production gear to achieve decent results. The $6k camera doesnt get you much without a $10k upgrade to your post.

The XLH1 is not a rebadged XL2 that does HD. The lens, according to Canon, is all new and will resolve HD. I suspect it cost close to $3000 just for that lens, if not more. We'll see though, I wont debate to passionately the specifics of cameras that have not been released =o)



ash =o)

[myfriendimage]

I agree the price is way to inflated, reading about the design it does seem to similar to an Xl2. Good idea on why it is so much.

[AshG]

I suspect that those of you talking about the inflated price dont have any clue what HD gear goes for. A smallish DVCproHD deck that will do HD-SDI in is almost $30,000.
You ever priced an HD lens? $20K to $100K+

ash =o)

[Luis Caffesse]

I suppose it's easy enough to find out if the price is inflated and much as some people seem to think it is... wait a few months.

If it's really 2-3K overpriced then it won't sell.
If it doesn't sell, then the price will drop.

I seriously doubt you're going to see a 2-3K price drop (barring dreams of course).

By the way, good to see you in these neck of the woods Ash.
You should add that doc link to your sig here, it's good stuff.

[stephenvv]

Street on the XL2 is $3699, XLH $8999. Street for the DVX100b is $3299, HVX $5999. By your very same logic, shouldnt there be a bunch of disgruntled DVX owners?

Nope, because you have to add the Firestore or P2 to record HD. Without those, the HVX records DV only. Let's see, native 16:9 CCDs, HD Glass and the other upgrades, $5999 sound exactly right.

The XL H1 only offers a HDV deck, it's supposedly superior lens (and the promise of other lenses) and HD-SDI as a $3k upgrade over the HVX. Unless the lens kicks the HVX's ass, I think the price is inflated to protect XL2 sales. I'm speculating based on circumstantial evidence, but let's see what happens.

[stephenvv]

I suspect that those of you talking about the inflated price dont have any clue what HD gear goes for. A smallish DVCproHD deck that will do HD-SDI in is almost $30,000.
You ever priced an HD lens? $20K to $100K+

ash =o)

The HD lens on the HD100 runs about $800 or so (depending on how much a loss JVC is taking). Technically, all the new Sony HDV cams are "HD gear". We have to wait and see if the XL H1 lens resolves and meets a pro HD lens quality, mechanics and performance.

[Barry_Green]

I doubt the price is inflated to protect XL2 sales. Why? 'Cause the XL2 isn't selling. It's not doing nearly as well as Canon would have hoped, and one XL2 dealer I know just dropped the line because B&H is giving away the cameras at dealer cost, so dealers can't compete.

I can see trying to protect a product line that's selling well and making you money; obviously you wouldn't want to kill the goose that's laying the golden egg. But the XL2 is just laying an egg, not a golden one. It didn't capture the market (at least in the US; I would imagine it would perform better in 16:9-hungry Europe) so why would they go to lengths to overprice the XL H1 just to "protect" the XL2?

I dunno, it doesn't seem to be adding up.

Frankly, I don't think Canon's aiming at the same crowd at all. They've staked out their territory, and it ain't "indie filmmakers" -- they're after TV stations, all the local broadcasters who are eventually going to move to HD, etc. So they kitted it out and priced it for that market, and they really don't care to compete against the HVX/HD100/Z1 at all. They're specializing, and I think it's a pretty smart move on their part.

[Digigenic]

...Frankly, I don't think Canon's aiming at the same crowd at all. They've staked out their territory, and it ain't "indie filmmakers"...
That's true for the most part, but why would Canon have gone to such great lengths to incorporate the pseudo 24 progressive frame thingy? IMO, They clearly still have an interest in appealing to the indie in that regard. I do agree that their targeting of the local broadcaster with everything else is pretty smart.
As a result, we may likely see the GL successor step up to fill in as Canon's full-time indie filmmaker camera, and that should prove to be pretty interesting.

[stephenvv]

I doubt the price is inflated to protect XL2 sales. Why? 'Cause the XL2 isn't selling. It's not doing nearly as well as Canon would have hoped, and one XL2 dealer I know just dropped the line because B&H is giving away the cameras at dealer cost, so dealers can't compete

Very interesting info. I hadn't heard that info before. I knew the XL2 was not selling like the XL1, but had not heard sales were that low.

Still, even though Canon may be going for broadcasters (why the 24F thing, as Jacob pointed out?), the camera itself still came to market fast for canon and looks so much like an XL2, I still wonder. Hopefully it will hit the street very soon and people can start tearing it apart and see if my speculation has any merit.

[MattC]

I think the pseudo 24p thing is there precisely for the TV broadcast market. Many shows are shooting for a "film look" (or more precisely a filmish video look) and the Canon will probably be very good at that. But that's very different from an independent "FILM" look.

Also, because of this market, I think Canon will supply superior glass, certainly to the JVC. I mean, glass is what Canon does best, and if you want to have the best looking "VIDEO" image (and that's Canons base market) you need exceptional glass. That doesn't necessarily mean it's better for everything though, look at how many indie folks think the XL2 image looks TOO sharp....

I agree with Barry, Canon staked out it's market and it ain't us...

[icicle22]

The HD lens on the HD100 runs about $800 or so (depending on how much a loss JVC is taking). Technically, all the new Sony HDV cams are "HD gear". We have to wait and see if the XL H1 lens resolves and meets a pro HD lens quality, mechanics and performance.

Stephen,
You cannot even buy a Canon SD manual lens used for $800 so that should tell you the quality of the lens from JVC. I think there is very little doubt that the Canon HD glass is excellent and may be the "best" of the "affordable" HD cameras around...from a strictly glass point of view. I'm still hedging my bets on the HVX strictly because it has all of the features I want with a lens that is wide and has a really good zoom range. But I still think the glass on the Canon will be top notch and maybe technically superior. Other elements of the HVX will ultimately make it a better camera for me.

[TheGSpot]

I don't think its fair to say that Canon has staked out the broadcast market, yes maybe the MTV channels out there.. but im sure the XL-H1 will have the "film-look" with the proper lighting.. besides.. most of those channels are still shooting with the DVX. the more logical choice for them would be the HVX. Both cameras are exellent from what ive read so far. As far as im concerned.. if you're doing an indie or short Rent the P+S mini 35 adaptor and a set of 35mm primes from your local camera house, and shoot :)

[thisiswells]

I saw an FX1/PD150 looking camera on TRL the other day.

[BobF]

Although Fujinon made the 1/3" $800 lens on the JVC HD100 you can only purchase it through JVC, not Fujinon. From what I've heard the chromatic aberation is very bad and Fujinon probably doesn't want to take "credit" for the shortcuts they had to make when JVC commissioned such a cheap lens. However, Fujinon does sell a 1/2" lens that fits on the HD100 via the $1,400 ACM-12 adapter. The S20X6.4BMD-DST sells for a "bargain" (Fujinon rep's words) price of $10,000. So clearly a half way decent lens could be the difference between the price of the JVC and the premium price of the Canon.

[Barry_Green]

Completely agreed. And the Canon's glass does seem nice indeed.

[tktk]

Prices seem high indeed, but you have to look at the overall picture. Don't know about you all, but a long time ago I paid over 5grand for an xl1. For almost the same amount of money, now I can get a panasonic hvx200. For about 2/3 the price I can get a dvx100b or a XL2 for a little more money. Point being.... if you really think about it even canon's 9grand for HDcamera is not all that bad. Got to play with it a bit and saw some footage and it was pretty impressive. Still for the money, HVX has clear advantage... not to mention all the other wonderful features.

[Konrad]

A bare bones H1 HD-SDI setup is around $16K if you go the cineform route. That includes; Camera, Capture Card, Build it yourself dual AMD PC and Cineform software. NLE not included.


That's just what I've read, it seems a lot cheaper as an all inclusive package than buying a HD VTR deck.

If Adobe does DVCproHD in PPro 2 and all you need is Firewire for capture that will tilt the balance to Panny in a big way as Intel laptops and Adobe Software is cheaper than apple.

edit

Although the Apple route at $10,400 is cheaper than the Cineform H1 route

HVX $6000, $2,999 PowerBook and $1,399 FCP is a cheaper solution

[stephenvv]

Looks like I might be right:

http://www.geosynchrony.com/scratchpad.htm

Interesting....

[MattC]

I REALLY like Canon's glass. It's one of the reasons I like the XL2 it delivers a super sharp image. Not a good thing in everyone's eyes, though...

I also like the fact that the XL2 delivers an incredibly clean (relatively noise free) image. I was a bit disappointed by the DVX in this regard. I'm really hoping that that issue has been addressed by the HVX (same thing with the audio concerns). But, since the HVX is a brand new cam and the DVX (I assume) uses, comparatively, much older technology, I'm assuming these things will be much better with the newer HVX. Also, while I don't expect the glass to be as good as that on the Canon, I think the glass on the HVX will still be quite good - certainly good enough. I saw JVC camera at B&H and I have to tell you, I thought their glass sucked. But again, much of this is subjective.

Matt

[cschiller]

I'm curious to know their sales figures... I mean, are people REALLY buying it? Does anybody know?

[Barry_Green]

I'm curious to know their sales figures... I mean, are people REALLY buying it? Does anybody know?
Buying what? The XL2? The XLH1?

There's no real way to tell, other than just asking the vendors and seeing what they'll tell you. But you have to ask a bunch to get a good statistical sample. And even then, it's not really possible with the Canon XLH1, because they've severely restricted the # of dealers who can carry it, so just asking for % of units sold would be misleading at a dealership that does carry it, just like it would be at a dealership that didn't carry it (because obviously at that dealership, the % will be zero).

Manufacturers do not typically release camcorder sales figures.

[Mr. Blonde]

I've noticed alot of abberation from the H1's lens, seems canon continues to forget about this problem...

[AshG]

HUH??? Are you commenting on lenses with adapters in front of them? You just dont like Canon it seems. Their glass is impeccable in the price range. Aberrations are RARE and usually from filters or adapters....


ash =o)

[MattC]

I 'm with ASH on this one. Sorry Mr. Blonde, I've played with a lot of cannons glass and find it to be outstanding and usually aberration free.