For best quality, uneless the speaker are within a couple feet of each other, your best bet is to mic each separately which can mean separate systems.

However, in the modest cost range the Azden WR-22 Pro receiver does support two mics on one system.

For voice the mic should be with in a couple feet of the talent for decent sound. If more than a few feet you start to get that in-a-tunnel sound.

I am just about to get a firewire and do some editing at home and have got a query for you.

I am going to edit a piece that will need to be output to VHS - probably about 20 copies of about 90 mins long. I have no access to a DV player and would not like to use all these hours rolling the mater from my XL1s, bo I was wondering if it is possible to take the piece straight from the computer (Avid Xpress DV) via firewire to the XL1s and use the phono plugs into a VHS. In this way, there would be no need to roll tape except for in the VHS itself, but I'm not sure if it would work.

Has anyone got any experience of this at all or is there another way I can work around it.

Regards
Jon

Hi Jon

Yes you can go directly to VHS from your computer by using your XL1s as a converter.

The video signal goes to your camera via fire wire as a digital signal, the camera converts the signal and sends the analogue signal trough the RCA video and audio plugs on the back of the XL1s to the VHS machines.

The XL1s does not have to be in record mode to do this.

I use Final Cut Pro and do this quite often without any problems, I simply export my video to tape without using the record function on the XL1s and have the signal pass trough the RCA plugs to the VHS machine.

Regards

All I would add is use S-video cable if your XL1 and VCR have it. The image quality is sufficiently better to make it a habit. Some people confuse S-VHS with S-Video. The latter is just a different connector, not a different and less compatible tape format.

David Hurdon

Many people wonder how the XL1 can look. I knew I did before I got it. Well, let me post a picture!

Some post processing, but not much at all, just a little tweaking.
and true dof.

http://www.atamashi.com/dance/index.html

Hi Andreas,

What do you mean by "true DOF"?

Is "true DOF" the name of a plugin or process you applied to the image? Or do you mean to say that the image accurately reflects the depth of field achieved by the standard XL1 lens?

I mean to say that the image accuratley reflects the dof achived by the standard 16x lens.

So didn't fake it in any way.
(like applying blur to the background)

Howdy from Texas,

Download the official Canon XL1S screensaver (http://www.canondv.com/xl1s/screensaver.html) directly from Canon USA, and your computer will dream about the camcorder whenever it goes to sleep. A very nice, slick freebie from CUSA. Check it out!

The sports wallpaper looks pretty dodgy, especially the circa 1980's snowboard picture. You'd think Canon could come up with something a little more up-to-date.

The heck with the wallpaper -- I'm diggin' the undersea-themed screensaver!

From our sponsors

http://www.zgc.com/zgc.nsf/active/6FA3DA5F0C16A24985256B82007B576D
http://www.bhphotovideo.com/?BI=155
http://www.zotzdigital.com/?page=shop/browse&company_id=Lightwave&ps_session=ef4506e8180d4c24c9bc253f7876444f

What does "transferred for broadband use" mean? If you are
going to put up your video on the web you probably don't want
to use the full resolution and thus the sharpness loss will be
less of an issue.

If you mean broadcast use then the signal will probably be
distorted by the mpeg2 encoders most stations use to the point
that it also doesn't matter much (most people don't have that
good TV sets anyway).

There will be some resolution/sharpness loss when shooting
in frame mode. Whether this constitutes to a quality loss is up
to you. Personally I really like the frame mode look of my XL1S.

Keep in mind that you don't want to resample 25 fps to 24 fps,
you'd want to have the system interpret the footage at a
different rate only. The audio will need changing indeed.

Also keep in mind that PAL video is 720x576 and NTSC is
720x480. But if you also have the package output the footage
at a 0.9 pixel aspect instead of 1.067 it should be able to
output it at 720x480.

Can you set the XL1s to a different auto IRE than what the factory default is?

I like being able to use the auto exposure when I'm shooting on the fly and it's faced paced and I can stop to make sure my expoure is good with everything else that's going on. The default is way too hot most of the time. Can the be adjusted without sending it back to Canon?

Thanks

You can use the exposure compensation dial which is right below the audio meters.

Dean Sensui
Base Two Productions

http://cgi.ebay.ca/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2956283025&category=20330

According to the seller, this is a unique lens with a custom mount. What are you thinking about that?

If its just one of a kind its a shame. Front element photo shows its a Fujinon lens, and the specs seem interesting.

Shame its in Cali and not England though.

This may seem like a dumb question owning an xl-1s, but does the standard lens accept filters like those made by tiffen? I have never used filters before but now I am at a point that I want to. Do any special accessories need to be purchased? Does it just screw on?

If these filters work for the XL-1, do they work for the Gl-1?

Would it be a 58mm or 72mm filter?

Dan

The XL1S accepts any standard round 72mm filter such as those by Tiffen, Hoya, etc. They screw right onto the front of the lens.

The GL1 / GL2 requires a smaller diameter filter, 58mm. Therefore the round filters are not interchangeable between the XL and GL camcorders.

With the addition of a matte box, you can use standard 4" by 4" square filters with either camera. Some matte boxes simply clamp to the front of the lens, other boxes require separate mounting rails. These are very effective but somewhat expensive.

For your first filters, I recommend trying the round 72mm types, they're a bit more affordable than the square filter / matte box arrangement. Hope this helps,

Any one know anything about this adapter? .7X72mm lens converter from 47st. photo


http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=2957707778&category=29964&rd=1

Who makes it I wonder? Sounds too cheap to be a quality adapter for a 72mm thread mount.

From the Ebay auctions I've seen 47th St. Photo run, anything no-name they sell is pretty cheap (in more ways than one). I won't say it's absolute garbage, because that might be libel, but it's what I'm thinking.

1. Over this past weekend I had the opportunity to work with that Panasonic with 24p technology. I am a XL1s owner and devotee, and curious about the real differences between what the XL1s is capable of compared with a camera with 24p technology. It's difficult to find objective information on the subject due to the marketing machines buzzing about both devices.

2. Canon's EF adapter is described on Canon's website as providing "quality still imaging." Are the Canon still lenses that attach to this camera designated for stills only? I'm interested in attaching manual lenses to my XL1s, because I have slightly more experience with film and believe I can work more efficiently with manual-style lenses.

Thanks for any help you guys can provide!

I posted a similar question in the 'lenses and imaging' thread. I just shot some footage with the Panasonic that has 24p technology, but I am an XL1s owner and devotee. I'm looking for more objective reactions to and evaluations of this 24p technology and it's immediate future than the marketing-flooded internet can provide.

Thanks!

Chris:

You may find much information on both these subjects by searching the database here.

Briefly, and in my opinion:

For outputting to film, a 24p camera has a certain advantage in that it delivers 1:1 framing, temporally speaking (doesn't require a reverse pulldown as would 60i as available on the XL1). The Frame mode on the XL1 is roughly equivalent to the 30P mode on the Panasonic, but with reduced resolution., but this is not a recommended mode to output to film. For achieving a filmlike look to video, some prefer the 30P/Frame mode over 24P as it is not as "jittery". It's a choice. Ultimately it comes down to the filmmaker's preference. 24P is a hot buzzword but has not rendered non-24P cameras obsolete just yet.

Still lenses with the EF adaptor will magnify in focal length 7.2 times, making all but the widest lens a telephoto. If you are used to cine-type lenses, check out Canon's 16x and 14x manual lenses for the XL1, which deliver direct control of focus, iris and zoom.

Videomaker ran an article on 24P a few months ago. You might find it interesting. Joe and Jane Sixpack viewers will never know the difference.

Do the manual xl-1 lenses offer shallower depth of field than the standard 16x?
Just Curious.

DOF would be limited by the maximum aperture (smallest numerical F number). You may want to read this article (http://www.dvinfo.net/articles/optics/dofskinny.php) I wrote for the site. The corresponding DOF thread is here. (http://www.dvinfo.net/conf/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3926)

I need to export some footage in Premiere 6.5 for a powerpoint presentation. The DVD and mpeg-2 settings in the mpeg exporter have a frame size of 720 x 480 which looks stretched horizontally in powerpoint. (Which I expect has to do with pixel size on the computer screen.) Does anyone have any advice for an export setting of about that size that I won't have to resize in powerpoint to keep looking natural?

Thanks. This is a great forum.

James

Hi there. My friend just lent me a sennheiser shot-gun mic, which is using a 1/8inch plug. What do I do to plug that into my camera?

I need it working for tomorrow.

Thanks

Well, just wanted to let everyone know that I was able to figure it out, and it was quite interesting.

I had to plug the 1/8" mini jack into a 1/4" converter, which then pluged into an RCA-F connecter. I plugged that into my short RCA-M connector into the audio 2 port :)

Works great!

Thanks everyone....

Chris,

If you like the look or feel of 24P you should know that 30P (NTSC) or 25P (PAL) will yield a very similar effect and in some cases a preferred one over 24P when watching on TV/DVD/VHS.

Others have been shooting 60i and converting to 30P in post for over a decade now. I myself have been doing this since the late 90's with deinterlacing software. It is far superior to FRAME mode on the Canon so shoot interlaced with your XL1 and give it a try. You can try it with the demo offered by www.dvfilm.com, just be sure to turn off some of the color correctiong options and only use the 3:2 effect.

There's an article on this software on this site: http://www.videosystems.com/ar/video_dvfilms_dvfilm_maker/index.htm

And here's a link to a "Deinterlacer Shootout": http://home.planet.nl/~snuve011/bram/de-interlaced/de-interlaced.html

Looking around for folks using primes on their xl1s, wanted to know what sizes are the best to purchase, i.e. 20mm, 35mm, 50mm etc.

Any help is good.

Cheers,

Dick Steele

Anyone, tried to use a dvx100 anamorphic on the xl1s, fabricating an adapter would be relatively easy. Just do not know if it is worth it. Anyone thought about this.

Cheers,

Dick Steele

That's an interesting question, Dick. But I'd be surprised if it works well. The DVX100's Leica lens is, of course, built-in and probably has a different distance to focal plane (ccd's) than the Canon lenses. I would imagine that such differences would cause troubles with the imaging.

We finally got a Canon tech on the phone last night, and asked about the audio oscillation that occured with the manual 16x lens connected to an older xl1 body. The tech conceded that there was a possibility of conflict, and that he reccomended returning the manual lens. (See the Myster audio Post I put up).

Just so those with xl1 models know about it.

Just heard from another Canon rep. They are reassesing the problem and have asked to see the lens. We are shipping it off to them. Will keep the board posted.

Richard

I've been wondering about a good ( & about 5") LCD monitor that is on- camera mountable. I have an XL1s.

I've seen (XL1s) cameras with LCD monitors mounted onto the viewfinder. How do they hook up to the camera so that the image is presented on the screen?

Thanks,

C.

I've been looking at the Sennheiser Brand of Shotgun microphones. What are the best quality camera mountable shotgun mics for the use with a Canon XL1s?

Thanks,

C.

Hello Fellow XL1'ers,

I'm in the process of shopping around for a VTR for my system. I currently capture directly from the XL1 into my Mac, and am looking to upgrade to a more robust capture system. I have been hearing good things about the Sony DSR-1500a. However, in the past I have had problems using Sony products in conjunction with my XL1. For instance, one time I got some footage transferred from 16mm film onto Mini-Dv via a Sony deck. When I put the tape into my XL1, the footage wouldn't sync up and stabilize. I had to rent a Sony deck and capture that way. I have heard other such stories which leads me to believe there is a consistent problem between Sony and Canon products.

So.... if anyone has any recommendations about a reliable VTR to use with my Canon XL1 footage, I'd appreciate the advice. Even better, if someone has actually used the DSR1500 with XL1 footage, let me know if it works.

thanx
thane

I use a JVC GRD70 as my capture deck.

Only if you need the flexibility / ability to use DVCAM tapes and full-size DV tapes (not just miniDV tapes), get a Sony deck like the DSR-11 or 1500a.

Otherwise, your XL-1 is recording in DV (not DVCAM) on miniDV tapes, so a basic miniDV camera may be all you really need.

You can get one for about $300 or less. You would not have the robustness of a dedicated deck, but you wouldn't have the expense of one either, and a basic miniDV camera would function perfectly for your purposes.

Also, when it's not functioning as your capture deck you or a family member have a small, easy to carry camcorder / digital still camera.

I'd put the money that would have gone into a DSR-1500a towards a lens or stabilization system.

One last note: I'd guess when you got your 16mm film transferred to miniDV on a Sony deck, the Sony deck was set on DVCAM mode. That's why the tape didn't play back right on your XL1, and that's why it took renting a Sony deck to capture the footage. To the Mac, DV and DVCAM are the same thing. But to a tape deck or camera, they are different. The person who transferred your 16mm film should have set the miniDV deck to DV mode instead of DVCAM.

Hi. They get their video signal from the composite video-out behind the door on the back of the camera. They get their power through a battery. Hope this helps.

http://www.nebtek.com/lcdmon.html

Hi there-

Is there any way to adapt or modify a PAL standard XL1s viewfinder to an NTSC XL1s body? Thanks for any help.

Jeremy

No, not without considerable expense. The XL1 viewfinder is a small CRT (TV). You would need a standards convertor to change NTSC to PAL for the VF. Not practical in size, weight or cost.

Hey guys.

Obviously, the standard XL shoulder pad isn't really...well, fine-just ISN'T...very comfortable.

The solutions, of course, are buy new one, or make your own. The avantage with making your own is you can create room for what you personally need in your filming situations...and the advantage with pre-mades are, well, they'e pre-made.

What is your guys' opinions on the best solution for this?


Thanks for reading.


Fig

Adaptors from XL1 Solutions, Inc. are prominently displayed on the front page of the XL1 Watchdog website. In the text, the owner of the company claims that his adaptors produce a 1.5X or 2X focal-length conversion effect. This means that a 28mm photo lens is automatically converted to a 56mm when it is mounted on a Canon XL1 via the adaptor.

The owner of the company promised the members of this post a risk-free trial period. I went ahead and purchased a Nikon-XL1 lens adaptor. I then conducted a test to determine the truthfulness of the company's claims.

I used a 28-80mm Nikon-mounted lens for this experiment. Please check out the link below to see the photos.

http://f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/dobe_dobe2000/lst?.dir=/Nikon+Adaptor+Testing&.src=ph&.order=&.view=t&.done=http%3a//f1.pg.photos.yahoo.com/

The lens is first mounted on the XL1 with the adaptor. The subject is exactly 14 feet away from the front of the lens. I recorded the image having set the lens to 28mm. In theory, I would have gotten a 56mm image.

My next step was to place the same lens on a Nikon N60 still-photo camera. I took a picture of the subject at 14 feet, after setting the lens to 28mm. I then zoomed the lens in further. I took a picture at 80mm.

In theory, the video I've recorded with the Nikon-XL1 adaptor is suppose to be a wider shot than the 80mm photo. (28x2=56mm, a 56mm is wider than a 80mm) It was not the case.

The 2X conversion claim does not hold up.

Thanks for your help!

this is a faulty test because of the difference in distance from the lens back element to the camera focal plane and sizes of the sensor in a digital still camera vs a 1/3 inch sensor like in the XL1. The image sizes are not comparable.

I suggest you repeat the test using different lenses on the same camera, set each lens at the same focal length.

I also suggest that you also take two exposures at the same aperture setting with each lens. I think you'll be happy to notice the reduced DOF with the 35mm format lens vs the 8mm format lens.

You need to resize by the pixel aspect ration on the horizontal.
Which is either 0.9 (NTSC) or 1.067 (PAL). This yields a resolution
of 648 x 480 or 768 x 480.

I assume you are talking about using these with the 35mm
adapter?