Echo Park Dusk: an XF300 video

cowpunk52

cowpunk52

Veteran

Had some time to kill between gigs downtown, and decided to grab some footage at Echo Park. The fountain wasn't working on the evening I shot, but there was still plenty else to see at the park - like the dozen or so species of local and migratory birds that love to hang out by it's 13 acre lake.

Shot on a Canon XF300
CP: XF Mojo
Gain: -6db through +18db

Music is "I love N.Y.E." by Badly Drawn Boy
 
I really like the Canon XF's. Probably the best looking 1/3rd inch camera on the market. Some very pretty footage there.
 
very nice, Cowpunk. The resolution from the XF is incredible.

How is the XF being received in LA? Are many people in the business aware of it? Do you get requests for the camera?
 
vanvideo said:
How is the XF being received in LA? Are many people in the business aware of it? Do you get requests for the camera?
Click to expand...

Well, it's pretty hard to say. A lot of stuff I work on has cameras provided by production - usually 2/3" ENG cams or Canon DSLR's for the productions I work on. I've shot one broadcast show that used it, a travel show, and we shot three episodes on it. I also shoot most the material for my personal clients on it, and every once in a while a production will get in touch with me specifically because of the XF300 (it's a very small number of people that own/operate them here). But more often than not, producers haven't heard about it or know nothing about it. After showing them footage and showing the camera, they get pretty excited, though.

I think that when Canon expands the XF line and these cameras become more prolific, they'll get more requests. Several major broadcasters are looking very seriously at the line, and I know that the BBC purchased hundreds and is currently shifting many of it's operators to these cameras. Hopefully, for my wallet's sake, LA will follow that trend (but I'm not holding my breath)!
 
I am looking hard at the XF305 for my next camera. Most of my work is like yours - production companies that provide the 2/3" gear, or with established clients who wouldn't know one camera from the next. All they ask is it give presentable, airable video. Of course, the camera I have now does that already.
 
Nice stuff...

I'm used to Canon so I've wondered about an XF300 and 35mm Adapter combo, but it's hard to weigh it out against the AF100. I feel like the 422 on the XF300 is well worth the price, and adapters don't give me as much trouble as they do others. Low-light will take a bit of a hit over the AF100 no doubts, but I just feel like a Canon XF300 with 35mm Adapter and DSLR as a B-cam would be a great combo. The 422 and higher bit-rate codec out of the box is hard to pass up for me.

Who knows...still waiting to see what my next project requires :)
 
I have an XF300 sitting in my office. I try to get out and shoot as often as I can....but I am sure you all know how that is. I am Very pleased with its quality and like the fact that I don't need to use P2 or SxS cards to capture with.
 
i like the image quality of the xf300/xf305 line of cameras.

and cowpunk52 does a lovely job demo-ing the virtues of his camera.

i wonder how the xf100/xf105 cameras will compare.

i know 3-chips compared to 1-chip will make a difference but i am looking forward to seeing the xf100/xf105 in well lit situations.

sometimes on these boards we all spend soooooo much time wondering about low light situations.

in my work, the difference between low light and enough light is one more lighting instrument.

ymmv

be well

rob
 
I love the XF series 4:2:2 color implementation. It has a much more realistic quality, with smoother color transitions. It makes it hard to go back to my dSLRs. Very hard, almost painful.

Love smaller cams, so waiting for reports on the XF100/105 series.

It reminds me of an expensive period of my life when I discovered that I really could hear the difference between very high end audio systems and systems costing only a few thousand dollars. It also became painful to listen to lesser systems. Audio pixel peeking. So I ended up with a five figure system and loved it. But I was spoiled for less systems.

So many people are coming into film making via the dSLRs, what will happen when they start to see the difference in color gradients? We already are selling add-on modules to capture better color. It is the audiophile race all over again. Bring it on!

Cowpunk52, thanks for the great shots.
 
Last edited:
Cowpunk, have you had any focusing issues? Some owners of the XF are having problems at wide angles and wide iris settings.
 
vanvideo said:
Cowpunk, have you had any focusing issues? Some owners of the XF are having problems at wide angles and wide iris settings.
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with it, but for sure wide open aperture at the widest focal length gives the weakest lens performance (but by any standards still performing exceptionally well). This is typically the case with any zoom lens. I have read of people complaining about parfocal accuracy, but in my experience, it is what I would expect given the zoom range & optical performance of the glass. There is always some sort of focus error in any zoom lens. In mine and others experience, parfocal accuracy is near perfect through the zoom range at any aperture with no ND. With any ND on, the parfocal performance is excellent when stopped down to f3.2 or smaller. With ND, accurate focus wide open at widest focal length requires some near focus compensation.
 
I am just about to buy a new cam and i am considering the XF300. Just here in our local area a lot people own e.g. ex1r or ex1 and say that the XF300 is very grainy and very bad regarding lowlight. Checking the web i just get a lot of confusing reviews and statements, the most seem to be from people who just hate the one or the other brand. My point is, i am just about to change into full HD (yep...late, i know). So is the difference between the ex1r and xf300 really that hard? In the end i am just looking for a good allrounder workhorse, which was in the past the vx2100 and fx1000 for me. So i will be happy for any hint, link, statement, from someone who really has hands on that cam(s).
 
mike9399 said:
I am just about to buy a new cam and i am considering the XF300. Just here in our local area a lot people own e.g. ex1r or ex1 and say that the XF300 is very grainy and very bad regarding lowlight. Checking the web i just get a lot of confusing reviews and statements, the most seem to be from people who just hate the one or the other brand. My point is, i am just about to change into full HD (yep...late, i know). So is the difference between the ex1r and xf300 really that hard? In the end i am just looking for a good allrounder workhorse, which was in the past the vx2100 and fx1000 for me. So i will be happy for any hint, link, statement, from someone who really has hands on that cam(s).
Click to expand...

The Canon XF300/305 is approved for full HD acquisition by the BBC - I don't know a better endorsement than that. In the end, both the Sony and the Canon are excellent cameras, and very solid workhorses. Professional broadcast productions are being done on either on at any given time. The Sony is more sensitive, the Canon has a better codec. Pick your poison.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top