HI CHRIS,

I HAVE SEEN NICE POSTINGS ON THE SITE. I AM THANKFUL TO YOU FOR THE INFORMATION. THIS INFORMATION HELPED PROFESSIONAL VIDEOGRAPHERS A LOT.
WELL ON MY PART , IT IS VERY GOOD ON PART OF CANON NOT IMPLEMENTING HD CONCEPT ON XL2, SINCE THERE OF PEOPLE WHO DOES'T AFFORD HD TECHNOLOGY, ESPECIALLY REST OF AMERICA. WELL I HOPE THEY HAVE TO WAIT FOR NEXT VERSION. 24P EVERY ONE ANTICIPATED, AS WELL 16:9 AND LCD A GREAT IMPROVEMENT.
BUT I AM NOT SATISFIED WITH CANON , IS IT DOESNT SUPPORT THE CANON ITSELF MADE BROADCASTING LENS. I THINK IT CLEARLY RESEMBLES THAT IT IS NOT SUITABLE FOR THE BROADCASTING.
WELL UNLIKE CANON XL1S IS XL2 IS OPERATED IN HIGH TEMPERATURES.ITS JUST A QUESTION. IN OUR PART OF THE WORLD ITS TOO HOT, WINDY BEACHES.
I OPERATE SONY PD170 , AS WELL AS CANON XL1S, THERE ARE LOT OF DIFFERENCES , PEOPLE LIKE CANON'S IMAGING QUALITY THAN PD170. ONE MORE THING AS XL1S FOCUS PROBLEMS, PD170 TOO HAS THE SAME THING HUNTING FOR FOCUS ESPECIALLY IN HIGH TEMPERATURES. WELL I KNOW WE DONT HAVE TO SHOOT IN HIGH TEMP. BUT TO LIVE WE HAVE TO DO.
MAY BE AFTER SOME PEOPLES REVIEWS, I PLAN TO BUY THE XL2 BODY. ANYWAY CHRIS.. THANKS FOR EVERYTHING.

VAMSHIDHAR.K

Hi Vamshidar,

I agree with you that it's still too soon for HDV.

Regarding the XL2 and Canon professional broadcast video lenses. The XL2 uses a lens mount designed for 1/3rd-inch CCD's. It has to, otherwise it would not be compatible with the earlier XL lenses, which would have made a lot of people unhappy.

All Canon professional broadcast video lenses use a larger lens mount designed for 1/2-inch CCD's and then an even bigger one for 2/3rd-inch CCD's. The camera can mount only one size. So if you were designing the camera, are you going to choose the 1/3rd-inch size, which is what all of your earlier customers had with the XL1 and XL1S, or are you going to abandon them completely and build a camera for 1/2-inch lenses which are much more expensive. If you do this, there's no way to bring it in for under five thousand dollars, and the lenses themselves cost over two thousand dollars at the least. Canon decided to build a camera for its previous XL customers. After all it is an XL2. If it has "XL" in the name then you know it's 1/3rd-inch. I doubt they will ever make a 1/2-inch or 2/3rd-inch camera head. It would compete with all the other manufacturers who use Canon lenses on their camera heads. Why would Canon throw away all of that long-established business just to offer a camera model.

I recommend using a rain slicker to protect your cameras from sand and wind.

By the way, your CAPS LOCK is stuck on! Hope this helps,

Chris,
Canon may not be as concerned about it's old customers as you think. Remember when the XL-1 came out and we had to throw away our VL adapters (for the L-2) and buy new XL ones? They probably have their own reasons for keeping the XL adapter.
With that said, can you answer a nagging question? The VL adapter had no glass in it. (I know, because I used to blow air through the hole to remove any dust). It was just a spacer with an EF mount ring and some electrical connections. Even if the XL series uses a different distance between the rear of the EF lens and the image plane than the L series did, the difference couldn't be much. Why not just a thicker or thinner adapter? The glass in the XL adapter is highly refractive and just degrades the image.