XL2 first real life impression

Re: XL2 first real life impression

The one that works.

That's the idea of my earlier post. These cameras and hopefully if these homemade HD camera are even half what they say they can be will push the price down. Because if the NBC's, ABC's CBS's, cable networks, everyone sees that you can get the same look for a smaller price. Then that'll drive down the prices of the Sony, Panasonic and others.

Which in turn helps us to create better product, which help those of us who would like to be in the studio world to show that we can do the same job for a fraction of the cost.

About the DP I don't know if he's good or bad. And he doesn't have to be world famous to be good. An old DP friend said to me once. "If I had twelve weeks to shoot instead of four, my stuff would look just as good because I'd have more time to light and so on."

But not the director, but someone else... forget that. If Panasonic came out with a DVX200 tomorrow would you go out and buy it?
 
Re: XL2 first real life impression

<<Some guy noticed it on the NTSC model too and described it as aliasing. Pretty bad stuff...What puzzles me though is the poor quality of the new 20x zoom...etc.>>

Why exactly would anyone indulge in this kind of jpeg masturbation and "I heard from some guy who saw a camera for a few minutes at a show"? There are two qualified and relatively well tested reviews of the preproduction model of the XL2. One from a senior producer for BBC the other from an obviously talented shooter with DVX experience. The comments regarding image quality were along the lines of "amazing", "stunning", "digibeta quality or better". Why would you even consider some compressed jpegs as a source of anything?

Seriously, the cameras early test footage is beautiful...that's already been pretty much a given just looking at the work of Johnnie in a run and gun situation. The reports have been glowing at the least, and that's before anyone has seen a production model and had a chance to really work the camera to it's potential.

Suggesting that the 20x lens is of "poor quality" is, no offense, ridiculous. Citing some seconf and third hand comments about color fringing and aliasing is equally ridculous as is using a jpeg of something posted on the net. No professional would take these comments or lack of support seriously. A pro would only trust their eyes and examples of other quality shooters. From those people as well as the few pros I know who worked with the camera for a few days at the DVExpo, the comments have been unanimous. In their judgement, the lens and camera performance are nothing short of outstanding.

I'll have one of the first production models in the coming days. I'll be doing a location and studio comparison using the new lens, 14x Fujinon and the P&S Mini35. Based on the only qualified reports I've read, the footage I've seen and the conversations with top shooters that have previewed this camera, I'll be very surprised to find any of the groundless specualtion to be anything but groundless speculation
 
 
Re: XL2 first real life impression

Well, some of us can look at an image and make fairly qualified judgements, some can sort through reality and hype, other are here just to prove that the Canon is the best. Some can see color fringing, some can't.

And to the small 1080p cameras, I think that CineForm/Premiere is working with the manufacturers on deBayer filtering and compression. I would not call them homemade cameras at all. There is probably a parallel effort to create homemade cameras and there is hidden effort to create factory made cameras and complete systems. We will soon find out. If Premiere works on the algorithm, we will have superb quality images, on the level of the $100K CineAlta.

I believe that the quality will be amazing. The two manufacturers have had the sample Altasens CMOS to play with long enough before the production runs start coming in to start manufacturing the cameras.
 
Re: XL2 first real life impression

<<Well, some of us can look at an image and make fairly qualified judgements,>>

exactly, which is why you need to see some "footage" that represents the actual camera output. As I said, no pro would even consider using a captured, compressed still from the net to judge anything.

<< can sort through reality and hype, other are here just to prove that the Canon is the best. Some can see color fringing, some can't. >>

What hype are you talking about? I referenced the only actual user reviews and footage and they are glowing in their praise of the image quality. Plus I've seen some of the footage and it's great.The only hype is coming from you in the sense that your negatively hyping something you have absolutely no experience with.

I don't know who it is you think can't judge chromatic abberation and aliasing, but my point was, is and is: you can't judge squat about a video image from a compressed web still capture. To say you can or to quote someone who had a few minutes exposure at a trade show is just plain hype and nonsense...especially when there is real life experience and examples right on this sight to prove otherwise.
 
Re: XL2 first real life impression

well,

i will see by myself "if" there is actually a color fringing from the XL2.
But i wonder why i dont see that kind of color fringing in JPEGs from DVX100A or SDX900, or PD170 and others...

just a normal question for a camera in that price range....i think...

anyway, the first regular prod units are supposed to be in store next week...

I stay tuned...
 
Re: XL2 first real life impression

Personal attacks or insults are not tolerated on dvxuser, so posts that tell someone "where to go" get deleted when they're found. I saw it, it was incendiary and added nothing useful to the conversation, so I deleted it before some flame war could start up.
 
Re: XL2 first real life impression

Yes. Often we must use pre-emtive strikes. People tend to get bigger for some reason on the internet; like road rage kind of.
 
Re: XL2 first real life impression

I agree 100% I don't know why we can't just agree to disagree. That each of us has are own thoughts. Its like color correction two people can go with different looks. It all boils down to personal choice and taste. Neither one is wrong.
 
Re: XL2 first real life impression

Thanks for keeping on top of things Barry :)
 
Re: XL2 first real life impression

The 20x is a nice piece of junk. The glass looks good as does most Canon lenses. But the lack of true focus and manual zoom make it a $1000 clunker. Makes no sense.
 
Re: XL2 first real life impression

[quote author=John Hudson link=board=XL2;num=1093021579;start=180#187 date=08/30/04 at 22:09:14]Yes.  Often we must use pre-emtive strikes.  People tend to get bigger for some reason on the internet; like road rage kind of.[/quote]

Ha! Road rage on the information superhighway!

Perhaps when we all finally get nerdy enough to rent out a hotel ballroom and have DVXUserCON 1, we can set up a boxing ring to finally settle who's the best miniDV cinematographer.

It could be called the "Punch your way to Prestige" event.
 
Re: XL2 first real life impression

[quote author=PFP_VIDEO link=board=XL2;num=1093021579;start=180#190 date=09/02/04 at 23:47:32]The 20x is a nice piece of junk. The glass looks good as does most Canon lenses. But the lack of true focus and manual zoom make it a $1000 clunker. Makes no sense.[/quote]

You should check out Canon's lens business sometime. Their $6,000+ 35mm tele lenses also have servo rings.

It's not junk just because it has servo rings...I certainly would rather have physical controls, but that's not what Canon's lens business is based in.

Canon glass is widely adopted by photographers the world over, even with the dreaded infinate spinning ring, so like most companies...Canon doesn't stray from what they know, thus the servo rings are standard.
 
Re: XL2 first real life impression

I have a Canom 1014 super8 and I used to have a Canon Scoopic 16mm. No infinite spinning. Canon eng pro lenses have real focus with no infinite spinning. If you're telling me they are marketing a camera with a long lens, that wildlife, event, and other videographers will find appealing.
But those people are going to have the focus and manual control of a consumer video camera. Then I say Canon has really strayed.
 
Re: XL2 first real life impression

How long do you think it's been since Canon has made a NEW super 8 camera or a 16mm lens? And their pro ENG lenses are exactly that...PRO. IE- they cost more then the XL2 and it's lens combined.

Canon did a complete redesign of their photographic lenses in the early 80's and totally ditched backwards compatability. Since then, they've embraced the servo ring on the vast majority of their AF lenses because it requires less of the motors internally and thus less power is used to focus and zoom. The XL1/XL2 seems to be based far more on their photographic designs then their ENG designs. It's not like they took a sweet manual lens and then added a bunch of electronic motors and a white plastic shell to keep you from all the manual gearing.

They make a few manual focus lenses and non-servo models, but they're an oddity in their lineup, servo is what they do.

I'm telling you that they're marketing a camera, not a lens (and stupidly I might add). People bought the XL1 for the camera, not for the lens, and I'm sure Canon's sales figures would attest to that fact. I can count on one hand the number of XL1's I've seen in the field with the optional manual zoom lens.

Wildlife, event, and other videographers comprise a market that is probably larger in volume then the independent film market, so if a long lens is advantageous to that group...it makes sense for canon to stay long.

You also suggest that the canon's focus and zoom controls are akin to a consumer video camera, but Canon's professional photographic lenses are designed the same way and consistently outsell it's main compeditor's manual-controlled AF lenses.

I don't buy anything canon because I don't like their lens designs, so I don't argue that there are many potential buyers out there who will be driven away by the XL2's standard lens (as I am personally). But I'm suggesting that the market outside of the fine-manual control independent filmmakers probably isn't as bothered by this as we are.

Canon has indeed strayed...but since their business is still photo, I'd suggest that they've "strayed" into this miniDV filmmaking thing.
 
Re: XL2 first real life impression

ok Newbie gets his two cents. The images you guys discuss, specifically the Interview one, cause that was the only clip i could download, Are both completly useable. I'd be proud if my camera were able to capture what he DVx did. IF you feel its too dark, get some lights. You guys are all pro's. If its too dark, brighten it up slightly. Quite simply, one thing ive learned in my little experince, is that i treat all my Video projects like paintings. You ahve to carefully create your image, maipulate what you need to.

The XL2 is amazing. But so is the DVX. Live with it. I dont even havea DVX, and i feel a kind of threat that it will be replaced, (im fiercley loyal to Inatiamte objects.) But interms of pure image, the XL2 was brighter, and showed much more of what was in the frame. But the color in the DVX was far superior IMO. Even though her face was darker. Its a question of look. Do you want her to emerge from Darkness or be cast in moon light. The XL2 is quite simply a technological marvel, rich black and saturated color with little Grain. But it has a "look". its kinda ghostly. Where as i feel liek the DVX sees what your eye would if you were there.

then again, for me XL2 would be over kill. A DVX gives me 97% of its capability, for 1500 less. is that three percent worth 1500.....? well to some of you yes. To me no. I will ook forward to the DVX. If in a couple years, my VideoART sells like crazy and i become rich, then **** it! i'll get a XL2, or whatever camera is the ass kicker of that moment. cause face it, if youre wired about the XL2, waita coupl years for HD,we will all havea Field day fearing for our precious pieces of plastic metal and Glass..

PS(doesnt JVC have a HD cam out already?)
 
Re: XL2 first real life impression

PS...ps 97% was arbitrary, i know one of you is gonna say something......... lol
 
Re: XL2 first real life impression

Why Canon did not provide manual focus and zoom rings? Why the color fringing?

Answer: ECON 102. It's the way business is done in Japan; in the West it's all about competition; in Japan it's all about cooperation. E.g. they do sue the Koreans about patent infringements, but not each other.

If Canon created a camera that would compete with a lot more expensive cameras by Sony and Panasonic, they would get 10x higher sales on their XL2. But if they did not, they would make a lot more money selling those $20K lenses for the more expensive competitor's cameras.

Canon also needs Sony and Matsushita technology for their camcorders. So why irritate them and have them go to Fuji.

By the way, Fujinon lenses are used more on top digital cinema productions than Canon lenses. And they are not less expensive. The new Star Wars is being shot with Fujinon lenses.

Canon lenses are optically excellent but Canon has always been more commercial than some of the other makers. Their main business is office equipment, not optics.

As to the color fringing on the XL2 -- it's been demonstrated quite well. And I doubt that this was a preproduction model. I'm sure that it was one of the first production models; the same batch is now distributed by Canon.
 
Re: XL2 first real life impression

[quote author=the_director link=board=XL2;num=1093021579;start=195#198 date=09/04/04 at 03:33:36]Canon lenses are optically excellent but Canon has always been more commercial than some of the other makers. Their main business is office equipment, not optics.[/quote]

Yamaha makes acoustic drums, stereo amplifiers and motorcycles, all of which they do pretty well. A company's diversification is not a good indicator of their faults, because typically each division is operated almost as a seperate entity. Canon may sell more copiers then SLR lenses, but their SLR lenses outsell their compeditors. IE- they obviously make good lenses, and the market (to some degree) preferrs them.

They're not building a substandard camera in order to placate rival japanese companies, that's rediculous to think. Optics aren't interchangeable in the sense that you just slap the elements into a different housing and suddenly you have a manual lens...Especially with servo based lenses. The elements are moved by motors, not helical gearing, so it's a completely different mechanical design.

Typically, there's years of R&D before a lens can be manufacturered in quantity. Do I think Canon could have made a manual lens to mate with the XL2? Yes. Does it surprise me that they didn't? No.

That being said, nothing is stopping anyone from renting the SLR adapter and using any number of canon manual lenses available for rent in any major city.

The color fringing...I'll have to see it in person. All cameras have color fringing to some degree, it's inescapable with standard pixel placement. The only digital solution to have the potential for zero color fringing is the Foevon sensor because the color sensing is essentially stacked on the sensor rather then tiled upon it.

Of course, I'm not interested in buying the XL2 in any way...renting it with all the prime lenses I want? Absolutely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top