New Canon Pro HD Camcorders Announced: XF300 & XF305

[Otis Grapsas]

I would say the 950x540 CCD models will exist for 2 more years. The replacements will probably use GOP compression and high resolution CMOS, just like the competition.

Panasonic did a lot more than any other company for its customers, by insisting on offering CCD and DVCPROHD at those prices. Low resolution CCD will be abandoned for sure since the customers are after pixels not pixel quality and full raster CCD is prohibitively expensive. Also, there is no competition for the new intraframe format in the <$10,000 range, so DVCPRO with its mediocre resolution by today standards will be removed from the low end models and replaced by the new format in the high end. There is no reason to expect intraframe formats to be sold with $5,000 camcorders. The trend is exactly the oppostite, GOP formats even in the $10,000 to $20,000 range.

 

[Emanuel]

To my book, the low resolution pseudo-HD chip was quite a disappointment from day one -- didn't even buy.

E.

 

[Nektonic]

I would say the 950x540 CCD models will exist for 2 more years. The replacements will probably use GOP compression and high resolution CMOS, just like the competition.

Panasonic did a lot more than any other company for its customers, by insisting on offering CCD and DVCPROHD at those prices. Low resolution CCD will be abandoned for sure since the customers are after pixels not pixel quality and full raster CCD is prohibitively expensive. Also, there is no competition for the new intraframe format in the <$10,000 range, so DVCPRO with its mediocre resolution by today standards will be removed from the low end models and replaced by the new format in the high end. There is no reason to expect intraframe formats to be sold with $5,000 camcorders. The trend is exactly the oppostite, GOP formats even in the $10,000 to $20,000 range.

I'm not totally obsessed with pixels. I'd rather have a well rounded camera over just pure high resolution alone. Also, I actually think CCD is not outdated just because CMOS is taking over the camera world. CMOS still has some issues like the rolling shutter and flash banding. Although, I'm confident those issues will eventually be weeded out as the tech evolves. So it should only get better over the next few years.

I was thinking that maybe Panasonic would want to kick things up a notch and offer a P2-based codec that would really blow away what Canon, Sony, and JVC currently offer with their MPEG-2 XDCam-type formats.

Right now though, this new Canon 50mbps 422 codec seems to be a nice and more affordable middle ground between the lower end stuff like AVC-HD and the more pricey stuff like AVC Intra and RED CODE. Judging films like Crank 2 and how nice it looked on the big screen and on Blu-ray, these XF Canon cameras should blow the best HDV can achieve into the weeds, and on cheap CF media to boot.

 

[Otis Grapsas]

I'm not totally obsessed with pixels. I'd rather have a well rounded camera over just pure high resolution alone. Also, I actually think CCD is not outdated just because CMOS is taking over the camera world. CMOS still has some issues like the rolling shutter and flash banding. Although, I'm confident those issues will eventually be weeded out as the tech evolves. So it should only get better over the next few years....

...Judging films like Crank 2 and how nice it looked on the big screen and on Blu-ray, these XF Canon cameras should blow the best HDV can achieve into the weeds, and on cheap CF media to boot.

I have only seen the Crank 2 trailer. It does not exactly look like film. Very high contrast throughout, clipping on faces, clipped cyan skies etc. For this type of camera work, CCD was a wise choice. Some action shots in the trailer though look like a small fixed rolling shutter camera that produces jello on the impact

The camera has stopped being the limitation years ago. Even for a feature. Now we have $1,000 24p dslr kits that produce adequate video. Only some very specific projects with lots of post production require intraframe or uncompressed.

 

[Nektonic]

I have only seen the Crank 2 trailer. It does not exactly look like film. Very high contrast throughout, clipping on faces, clipped cyan skies etc. For this type of camera work, CCD was a wise choice. Some action shots in the trailer though look like a small fixed rolling shutter camera that produces jello on the impact

I think the directors choose to amp it up a bit, so that is why it is has such a sharper and more contrasted look. It isn't as good as film or a Red One obviously, but it looks pretty freaking good, way better than I thought it would.

As for some of the shots having the rolling shutter, those would be the shots they filmed with the Canon HF10 or HF20 I believe. Most of Crank 2, probably 90% of it appeared to have been shot on the A1, with a bit of EX1 stuff mixed in as well.

The camera has stopped being the limitation years ago. Even for a feature. Now we have $1,000 24p dslr kits that produce adequate video. Only some very specific projects with lots of post production require intraframe or uncompressed.

Very true. That's why I think I'm gonna pick up a Canon T2i and wait until the fall to replace my XH-A1, which should hold me over until I can save a bit more money and compare and contrast the various new camera offerings. Still though, I would be lying if I didn't admit that I'm salivating over the XF300's specs.

 

[Emanuel]

The camera has stopped being the limitation years ago. Even for a feature. Now we have $1,000 24p dslr kits that produce adequate video. Only some very specific projects with lots of post production require intraframe or uncompressed.

It should be a mandatory sticky @ reduser :laugh: ;-)

 

[Nektonic]

Poor Canon. Their exciting announcement of the XF cams has been completely overshadowed by the recent Panasonic AF-100 announcement, along with Sony's small scale digital cinema camera announcement as well.

 

[dcloud]

i must admit they have really great features. too bad it costs $7,999 & $6,799.

 

[Nektonic]

i must admit they have really great features. too bad it costs $7,999 & $6,799.

Yeah, I was considering the cheaper model, and thought that maybe pairing it with a Canon DSLR might be the way to go. Now that the AF-100 has been announced, things have totally changed.

 

[cowpunk52]

I think things may have changed for those more interested in cinema-style video, but not necessarily for those that need an all-purpose HD video camera with lens and 4:2:2 color sampling. The Canon XF series still has some incredible features that a lot of people are going to find very useful for many shooting scenarios, and it'll have some things that the AF100 aren't going to offer out of the box. I, for one, am still in the market for an XF camera - especially considering that it's supposed to have 12 stops of dynamic range! This camera will also be available well before the AF100, and between June and December, it can more than pay for itself.

Besides, we really don't know when the AF100 will be widely available. Panasonic* obviously has no problem introducing their own small-sensor camcorders at the same time as announcing the AF100. I don't think it will influence those that are seriously in the market for new HD camcorder this summer. If you don't need a camera for the next 10 to 12 months - yeah, wait; when the time comes, get the camera that fits your project and your budget. If you do need a camera before then, the XF series is an amazing option - if it fits your project & your budget.

Personally, I plan on getting both (provided performance is up to snuff on each of them!)

*edit: and Sony, for that matter, with it's budget-cinema camera reveal

 

[lordybob]

It sounds perfect for event coverage and greenscreen shoots. 82mm lens means I cant use my Xh-A1 filters! Luckily I invested in a matte box with 4+4 filters.

I want to know if they will be releasing an Xl-H1 replacement, because I really want to go a little shoulder mounted.

 

[xqzt]

I wonder which cmos set between the af100 and x300 will be better with motion. I assume canon because the gh1 sensors are supposed to be very skewy compared to 3chip models. Still kind of upset nothing new at this level is global yet, oh well... panny's ccd mojo has got it on lock for now.

 

[Barry_Green]

I wonder which cmos set between the af100 and x300 will be better with motion. I assume canon because the gh1 sensors are supposed to be very skewy compared to 3chip models.

The GH1 and the 7D have basically exactly the same skew. There is no reason to assume that the X300 would have less skew than an AF100.

 

[ThunderousProductions]

Why is anyone talking about skew on the XF300 if it doesn't have line skipping? No line skipping = no skew. Think people think.
Af-100 at 1920x1080 with a 12.1 inch sensor = line skipping = skew.

 

[Barry_Green]

Why is anyone talking about skew on the XF300 if it doesn't have line skipping? No line skipping = no skew. Think people think.
Af-100 at 1920x1080 with a 12.1 inch sensor = line skipping = skew.

Not sure what you mean, but skew has nothing to do with line skipping. The Red One, the EX1, the EX3, the HPX370 and HPX300, the HMC40, all of them are native-res sensors with no line skipping, and they all have skew.

All rolling-shutter CMOS cameras have skew, and they always will.

 

[agcohn]

All rolling-shutter CMOS cameras have skew, and they always will.

But as sensor speed improves, shouldn't it be possible to reduce skew to the point of practical non-existance, or is there a point past which the skew cannot be improved with rolling-shutter CMOS?

 

[Barry_Green]

As long as the shutter "rolls" through the frame, there will always be skew. If you want skew gone, you want a global shutter.

 

[xqzt]

The GH1 and the 7D have basically exactly the same skew. There is no reason to assume that the X300 would have less skew than an AF100.

Well, x300 should have 3 chips and panny's new guy 1 chip. Does that make any difference. I've heard that dslr chips exhibit a bit more skew than 3chips, I could be wrong, but I'd like to know.

 

[Barry_Green]

Makes no difference; the EX1/EX3 and HPX300/HPX370 all have three chips.

Different cameras can show different levels of skew; the HPX370's 1080/24p skew is much improved over the HPX300's 1080/24p. But still, all of them (including the Thomson Infinity and the Red One) have skew.

If it has a rolling shutter, it's gonna skew. End of story. Yes some skew less than others, but they all skew.

 

[xqzt]

thanks for the info. I guess it would be the excessive aliasing that makes the dslrs look more wobbly. Im interested to see how the different manufacturers try their best to improve the phenomenon.

imho,the xf300 with its 422 has the tasty edge over the new avccam as long as they can decrease their chromatic aberrations.