New Canon xf100 vs. Canon XHA1S

J

jordy2324

Well-known member
Hey all,

I'm more into the DSLR field right now, but this new Canon camcorder caught my eye.

So -- for those more qualified -- how do you think this soon-to-be released XF100 stacks up against the XHA1s.

I know the XF100 is more in the vein of the XF300, but it will (likely and hopefully) be more in the price range of the XHA1s.

What do you think.....?
 
50mbps, 4:2:2 codec against HDV - I pick the XF100. Plus, CF cards for recording and a 2.2 million pixel 1/3" CMOS chip. It should also be price competitive with the A1, too.

I honestly don't know how a single 1/3" CMOS chip will perform. But for now, I'd go for the XF100.
 
price is $2.999.00. saw a post by a canon rep saying that sellers can sell the new camera for whatever price lower that they choose. the xf105 is supposed to be $3,999.00.

from what i can tell so far it does share a lot of what the xf300/305 has but being this is only a single 1/3" sensor vs the 3-1/3" in the xf300 has me wondering how much will be lost. i own a Sony EX1 and think the new xf300 beats it out in almost all aspects as far as IQ. im hoping this little camera shares near IQ as its big brother and only lacks features but not IQ. it would be a steal for 3k IMO.

david
www.davidprobst.com
 
david_p said:
price is $2.999.00. saw a post by a canon rep saying that sellers can sell the new camera for whatever price lower that they choose. the xf105 is supposed to be $3,999.00.

from what i can tell so far it does share a lot of what the xf300/305 has but being this is only a single 1/3" sensor vs the 3-1/3" in the xf300 has me wondering how much will be lost. i own a Sony EX1 and think the new xf300 beats it out in almost all aspects as far as IQ. im hoping this little camera shares near IQ as its big brother and only lacks features but not IQ. it would be a steal for 3k IMO.

david
www.davidprobst.com
Click to expand...

David-

Canon has suggested a price of $2,999. But they are allowing vendors to set their own price. I wouldn't be surprised if the street price was in the $2500 - $2750 range.

YMMV

Be well

Rob
Smalltalk Productions
 
I am very close to pulling the trigger on a XF 300.
But I have given the XF 100 some thought.
My concern is the single 1/3 sensor- which seems to be the main difference.
I can not imagine how this can compete with the 3 sensor IQ from the XF 300.
Low light performance will not even come close.

If it did- at half the price- it would completely kill the EX 300 line.
 
Looks like this cam is the first model in a new range by Canon, same as the HV20 was the first followed by the 30 then 40. The single sensor will be great otherwise they wouldn't do it.

Has the XF100 got audio limiters .. if not it doesn't stack up against the A1s for me.

When Canon stop producing the HV40 say goodbye to DV tape, that's the last tape camera.

Cheers.
 
Last edited:
So from what I'm reading- it's somewhat safe to assume the XF100 will outperform the XH-A1s?
Even with one sensor?
 
Bokes said:
So from what I'm reading- it's somewhat safe to assume the XF100 will outperform the XH-A1s?
Even with one sensor?
Click to expand...

I'll believe it when I see it. It is only going to be a single 1/3 sensor in the XF100. It would be a whole different ballgame if Canon went with a 2/3 or APS-C size sensor though.

Now codec-wise it will obviously outperform the A1s.
 
Raster said:
Looks like this cam is the first model in a new range by Canon, same as the HV20 was the first followed by the 30 then 40. The single sensor will be great otherwise they wouldn't do it.

Has the XF100 got audio limiters .. if not it doesn't stack up against the A1s for me.

When Canon stop producing the HV40 say goodbye to DV tape, that's the last tape camera.

Cheers.
Click to expand...


Here's what I found for audio:

Audio Recording system2-Channel, PCM digital recording, 16-Bit; 48kHz

and

Audio TerminalXLR 3-pin jack (2), Switchable between MIC/LINE, 3.5mm stereo mini-jack


Is 48kHz standard? Doesn't seem very high quality to me....
 
Thanks jordy, yep 16bit 48kHz is standard but PCM (Pulse Code Modulation) is reasonably rare for HDV on a videocamera and better quality than the usual MPEG1 audio layer 2 compression.

Groan ohhh no limiters :crybaby::crybaby: dear oh dear it wouldn't have cost more than $10 per unit to add the extra chip in the quantities they need .. here Canon go again.
Cheers.
 
Raster said:
Groan ohhh no limiters :crybaby::crybaby: dear oh dear it wouldn't have cost more than $10 per unit to add the extra chip in the quantities they need .. here Canon go again.
Cheers.
Click to expand...

Don't think there are limiters: here's the blurb from Canon's features list:
"Audio is recorded in 16-bit PCM format at 48 kHz for amazing quality and fidelity. And both the built-in microphone and XLR inputs have the option for automatic or full manual gain control. To prevent variations in the recorded audio level, the dials can be locked by closing the audio panel cover."

Looks like the replacement (finally!) for the GL2... but with way more customization and semi-pro manual control.

Peace.
 
It sounds like early to mid 2011 will be their release date. The $2999 price point looks to be pretty fair for what they are offering. Gives me enough time to put some money in the bank for this release. I have a 7D, but I would drop the dimes for this camera in a heartbeat.
 
One thing Canon did right or wrong depending on how you look at it, was to put the same sensor in the XH A1 as the XL H1. Lots of people dropped the H1 because they got the same thing in the A1. So Canon's obviously going to be aware that doing the same means the upper model can be impacted.

That said, I disagree that it would have the HF 20 chip. But you never know. Chip is only a part of the equation, this cam will have a far superior DSP, so you couldnt say thats its just a HF 20 with a pro body ( I know you didnt say that either dc, Im just making a point).

The price point on this camera will be very very competitive. Sure Canon are slower to deliver things like 4:2:2 and recording to cards, but when they finally do, its pretty much guaranteed to be cheaper than competitors for equivalent model.
 
Noel Evans said:
One thing Canon did right or wrong depending on how you look at it, was to put the same sensor in the XH A1 as the XL H1. Lots of people dropped the H1 because they got the same thing in the A1. So Canon's obviously going to be aware that doing the same means the upper model can be impacted.

That said, I disagree that it would have the HF 20 chip. But you never know. Chip is only a part of the equation, this cam will have a far superior DSP, so you couldnt say thats its just a HF 20 with a pro body ( I know you didnt say that either dc, Im just making a point).

The price point on this camera will be very very competitive. Sure Canon are slower to deliver things like 4:2:2 and recording to cards, but when they finally do, its pretty much guaranteed to be cheaper than competitors for equivalent model.
Click to expand...

yup but its most likely similar to the hmc40 where its a tm700 with pro body (better performance as you said)
btw its HF S20 not hf20... hf 20 is clearly inferior. hfs20 isnt that bad either...

price point is a bit high for me.. 4:2:2 sure.. but for what im going to use it, i wont need 4:2:2 :) but yes this is a great cam for certain circumstances
 
I'm excited about the XF100 as I have an XF300 being shipped to me this week.

I've been shooting with the Panasonic offerings for the last few years, thrilled to be coming back to Canon.

When I shoot stills, I shoot with 1D bodies, but bought a 7D to see if I could make it work for my style of video. I determined through much research, that I would need about $7K worth of kit to make it work for me, and not as well as a camcorder like the XF300. I love the 7D for video, but it is not suitable for documentary as I see it. Your milage may vary.

As I said above, i am excited for the 100 as a "lock-down" or second cam which could be the A or B cam depending on the situation. Yet, don't delude yourself about the IQ being higher than a 3-chipper. If you need to convince yourself of this because of budget, then go ahead. I am not saying this to be snooty. Truth is, content over technology is the winner any day. I have seen plenty of awesome stuff shot with crappy one chip cameras, including my all time favorite sports adventure documentary "From Nowhere to the Middle of Nowhere".

All this is a long winded way of giving you some insight into why I say, don't assume that it will out perform the camera with more chips and fatter glass. Likewise, don't assume that you need the higher IQ unless your clients demand it. And if your clients demand it, then you should be earning enough money to afford the better camera. If not, you are selling yourself, and by extension all of us professionals, short.

Good luck on your decision,
CK
 
codec and low light it should be a solid performer; plus its newer. however, it is a CMOS camera; there are things CMOS is not yet fully developed doing, if it was 3CCD i would buy 2; as its CMOS ill stick with twin XH A1's for now.
 
A single sensor like XF100 is always lower resolution than a 3 chip cam like the XF300. The single sensor requires a filter over it to develop the color information while the 3 chip cam does not. Further, even though the 3 chip cam is splitting the light beam it has 3 times the number of pixels (same number on each chip) and as a general rule ends up being more sensitive in low light.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top