Canon XF300 & XF305 Approved by BBC for Indie Companies

Guidelines are based on existing camera models usually. A guideline by an HD channel photographs a Sony 2/3" camcorder since there was nothing else available at the time at that quality level. I believe the 1/2" guideline followed a similar logic, there is nothing wrong with a specific sensor size, it only affects DOF. It can practically have any quality and any resolution and this is what a guideline usually attempts to specify.
 
Canon must be very happy with this review. Especially since Alan trashed the 5dII by refusing to even test it after noticing the alias problem:)
 
This is an overall sign of the times and I would not be surprised if Canon had contacted major broadcasters with their concept well before today. The thumbs up goes a long way for sales given it was out of spec for broadcast use in many eyes.

I thought 1/2" would be where the line was drawn but if they can not get enough original material produced because the budgets are not there then the standards have to reflect the world around them.

It is a nice camera but after watching a car video last night, the DOF is deep. Some of the outside shots had the whole world in focus. Not a bad thing but it is a departure of what we are used to for broadcast looking cameras.
 
BBC is mainly interested in technical signal quality, not creative cinematography considerations like DOF. They obviously don't like less than 4:2:2 color resolution codecs. Non of Sony's XDCAM-EX models are on the list, even the new PDW-350 2/3".
 
Last edited:
I can see the Monthy Python's sketch, The High Definition Camera Approval Process Sketch:)

I bet that if someone called and told them about the HPX codec they would add it to the list.

The Canons are not even out and they got approved. Very strange for BBC. It used to take months.
 
WOW, to be in the same class as a PDW 800 / 700 and the Red One says something about those Canon cameras.

It will be interesting to see where things go from here. Still people don't forget, how you use the tool is a lot more important the the tool you use.
 
Otis Grapsas said:
I can see the Monthy Python's sketch, The High Definition Camera Approval Process Sketch:)

I bet that if someone called and told them about the HPX codec they would add it to the list.

The Canons are not even out and they got approved. Very strange for BBC. It used to take months.
Click to expand...


Canons are out, at least on this side of the pond. B&H in NY has them in stock.
 
Otis Grapsas said:
I can see the Monthy Python's sketch, The High Definition Camera Approval Process Sketch:)

I bet that if someone called and told them about the HPX codec they would add it to the list.

The Canons are not even out and they got approved. Very strange for BBC. It used to take months.
Click to expand...
LOL Indeed.

@Razz16mm: We should take the Otis words on topic... ;-)

In the meantime, take a glance on the inferior acquisition device :)

http://vimeo.com/12755283
 
Emanuel said:
LOL Indeed.

@Razz16mm: We should take the Otis words on topic... ;-)

In the meantime, take a glance on the inferior acquisition device :)

http://vimeo.com/12755283
Click to expand...

Yeah I skipped the whole HDV thing. Was thinking about upgrading from my GL2 a couple of years ago, but just couldn't get that excited about any of the options I could afford at the time. Then Scarlet was announced and I decided to just wait for it.

BBC never approved any HDV format cameras either.

I certainly think the HPX370 should be a worthy candidate, but who knows?
Canon obviously did their homework on the XF series though.

http://www.vimeo.com/13134510

PS: Love that Aeromax. Stunningly beautiful car.
 
Emanuel said:
In the meantime, take a glance on the inferior acquisition device :)

http://vimeo.com/12755283
Click to expand...

The HDV part is 1080i scaled to progressive without proper progressive treatment or deinterlacing. The HDV blacks start at 16/256 also which obviously messes with the contrast. Plus it's 720p and what I call still mode videography. Cartes postales with slight motion in 1% of the frame. Got to love those online comparisons, they are so representative of real world video and so well executed:)
 
Discovery restrictions are based on format quality not imager size (with the exception of 16mm vs 35mm films).

Silver accepts 35mbit XDCAM HD, so they will probably accept 50mbit mpeg.

You will have to edit on uncompressed, high datarate DNxHD or DVCPROHD though.

Gold is out of the question, only intraframe formats are allowed and they need to be edited on uncompressed or the highest datarate DNxHD format available for a given frame rate.
 
Otis Grapsas said:
Discovery restrictions are based on format quality not imager size (with the exception of 16mm vs 35mm films).
Click to expand...
Mostly, but not entirely. DVCPRO-HD is accepted for unlimited acquisition, but the HVX200 was accepted only at the bronze level because they viewed the 1/3" optical imaging chain not good enough for Silver. They accept the HPX500 at Silver, and it's basically the same camera but 2/3" chips.
 
Barry_Green said:
Mostly, but not entirely. DVCPRO-HD is accepted for unlimited acquisition, but the HVX200 was accepted only at the bronze level because they viewed the 1/3" optical imaging chain not good enough for Silver. They accept the HPX500 at Silver, and it's basically the same camera but 2/3" chips.
Click to expand...

Interesting. The main difference is indeed the 4x larger pixel area.

And the Canon has pixels 4x smaller than the HVX and 16x smaller than the HPX500. That would rule the XF out.

What is funny though, is that the pixel area of the HVX is the same with that of an F900 or any 2/3" 1080p camera. Only the resolution is inferior, the pixel size and per pixel image quality is quite close. But if resolution was the problem, they wouldn't accept the HPX500:)
 
AFAIK, no 1/3" camera has been accepted as anything other than Bronze. I don't have the page in front of me, but they said something like "we found the optical performance to be on par with the 1/3" HDV cameras" or something like that, and therefore they classified the HVX in the same general category as the HDV cameras.

Whereas with the HPX500, they had no problems and rated it Silver for unlimited acquisition.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top