I own a canon xl1 and I'm "looking for" the xl1s. Is the MA 100 suitable with the xl1s or it's necessary to buy the MA 200?
Thank you very much,
Mic

Hello Mic,

Check out the page on the Watchdog called "XL1S Skinny." There you will find that *all* XL1 accessories are fully compatible with the XL1S (including the MA100). Likewise, all the new XL1S accessories (lenses, MA200, etc.) are fully compatible with the XL1. Hope this helps!

First of all: compliments for your site!
It's a very much good style.
I have learned lots of things on it.
I'm an independent filmmaker (mainly author and director and less camera operator - I can see that I am very ignorant about video technical questions.
Usually I follow my sensitivity when I have to built a frame, and I don't stop to do it till I see in the viefinder the image that I was looking for.
But as i'm a "video ignorant" man, I need to look for hints and tips everywhere is possible to get them seriously, and your site has been always of VERY GREAT support! Never boring. Thank you very much! :)
And yes, I see that there is an article about the compatibility of accessories of both cameras, as well.
That makes more confortable selling the xl1 and to go for the xl1 s.
Thank you again Chris... and I'm sure that I will post some messages here while shooting my movie, to ask for help, ehehe... Of course yes.
Have a good working,
Mic

Mic
All the XL1 stuff can be uses on the XL1s and the same the other way around.

Thank you very much Mark!
I have some accessories (ma100 + a good matt boxh with the xl1's ring adaptor, as well)... So, now, I feel not frustrated for that.
I'm going to take and read many informations about the new xl1s, before buyin it.. I'm trying to find out if somebody has already used it and if has discovered a bug? I hope not.
I need the xl1s to make a movie, a long one, so... I am a little scared to buy it without having some reports from those that have already tested it.
Anyway I have to say that the new features on that camera are very "appetitive"... I "feel" that in the end I will buy it, even if I'm sorry for the no anmorphic lens by Optex and other factories for the xl1/xl1s.
We'll see.
Thank you again,
Bye soon,
Mic

I had the XL1 and sold it to get the XL1s. I love the cam and its much better than the XL1

Mic,

There is no anamorphic adapter *yet* but don't give up hope -- the last time I talked to Century Precision, they said they might still make one. Also possibly Optex.

I haven't heard anything bad about the XL1S. Personally I've never used one, but everyone who has an XL1S seems to be very happy with it so far.

Thank you Chris... Thank you Mark!
I trust you...
And yes, I'm sure that the new features and the improvements on the camera are substantial. I think that many filmmakers will enjoy them very much.
And yes, I'm convincing myself to buy one as soon as possible, may be in one or two weeks.
If no anamorphic lens will be available I will shoot it in 4:3, using the two withe horizontal lines for the 16:9... I know that it is a true compromise, but I can live with it (with my next long movie)... because I think that the xl1s will allow me to "set" my frames accoringly to my aesthetic needs. In the meanwhile an anmorphic lens for the xl1s will come out, otherwise e, all together, will built one for it, ahaha! Joking...

PS. Just two different lines...
Thank you to all you americans, wonderful people, from who I am learning a lot about some technical stuffs, about video...
I feel to be near USA in this dramatic moment.
I know that many people in Europe are not always as appreciative to the USA as USA would deserve it very much, because all the good things taht USA have done for Italy and for the world, but be sure that on the other hand many many people here in Italy and in Europe are totally fond of you and the whole USA, and this is the majority!
I have never been in USA, but some of my hearth is there, for many reason, and my grandfather was there and there died, he never returned to Italy.
So... something so close to me is there, and something of myself is there as well.
I apologize for this different lines (no "video" in them, ehehe), but I felt to write them to you, at this time.
As I use to visit many american sites about video and other stuffs, and I have learned a lot, and I have to recognize it.

By soon,
Mic

Mic,

Thanks for your kind comments...

The best thing about doing the Watchdog website and running this message board, is hearing from people from all over the world. I was born and raised in the middle of America, and have never really travelled around the world like I've always wanted to.

The internet has been amazing for me because of the power to connect with people in other countries in many places that I have always wanted to visit. Someday I hope to see Italy and the rest of Europe, hopefully Australia and the Pacific... even if that never happens, I'll always remember these years, when it is so easy to communicate with people like you, from across an incredible distance.

I think about this every day, and I'm still amazed! Thanks,

MA-100 trouble

I'm using an XL1 and just recently added the MA100 XLR adapter.

I also bought an Azden 500udr wireless receiver and transmitter as well as an Azden SGM-2X shotgun mike, and a Sony ECM55b Lavalier mike.

My trouble is this: when I plug either mike directly into the camera, or run them through the wireless setup with an XLR plugon adapter, I get VERY little audio -- like somewhere in the -40 to -35 range on the VU meter. However, if I run any of the mikes through a powered mixer, I can crank the volume through the roof.

Canon says that the MA100 requires 600omh input. The SGM-2X and the Azden 500udr are both above this level. Any idea as to what is wrong? -- its really a pain in the neck to have to carry a portable mixer to make the wireless mikes work.

Thanks,

Dikran

This may be obvious but check your audio settings. It sounds like your audio 1/mic may be set to attenuate when maybe you need mic selected. Have you tried both automatic and manual settings?

No, thats set to audio 1, not att. And the adapter is plugged into the poper set of RCA jacks. I've tried AGC, manual, 16 bit stereo, 12 bit stereo 1-4 -- everything I could think of.

DY

Hmmm. What level settings are you using for Audio 1 Input from the menu? Reading the posts it sounds like you may have set the switch next to the level controls to Audio 1, but not set the Audio 1 In menu setting for MIC ATT (or perhaps MIC), and it may default to Line level.

You might also check that your ma-100 has its power plug connected , as it requires this to work. I only mention this as i sat for an hr once wondering why i had no audio.

Hi dear fellow videographers!

I have a question about the beachtek/studio1 XLR box.Is it really necessary to have one.Since the XL1 has manual audio controls,is not enough just to buy a XLR to mini-jack adapter(so you can plug a professional shotgun mic)for really cheap and use the xl1 audio controls?The beachtek doesn't have VU anyway right?You will still have to use the camera's VU or buy a mixer ,so what's the advantage of have a beachtek?


Thanks for the help folks!!


Adam

The primary advantage of these adapters is balanced audio, allowing for longer cable runs with less hum or noise.

The XL1 and the Canon XLR adapters have unbalanced audio. With longer cable runs, you have a risk of noise and hum.

This is the short version. Hope it helps,

Thanks again Chris.That's reason enough to spend the money on the little box.Any recomendations,beachtek,studio 1, elite?

Thanks.

Adam

There appears to be a slight concensus among web posters that that Studio One is a wee bit better than the Beachtek. Is it worth $30 more? I don't know. The Elite may be a remarketing of either the Beachtek or Studio One.

An alternative if using balanced mics is the Canon MA-100 (or MA-200) provides XLR conversion, about 6 dB gain, and the shoulder rest for a bit less money.

Sorry to sound uninformed but I'm new to this stuff-- so the MA-100 is unbalanced? And the beachtek model is balanced? I was under the impression that since the MA-100 was XLR -- it was balanced. So if this is true then the Beachtek model would be a much better buy, correct?? Just getting ready to buy and want to get the right adaptor.

Howdy from Texas,

<< I was under the impression that since the MA-100 was XLR -- it was balanced. >>

Ah, so... this is not so! Here's a direct quote from one of the top Audio-for-DV gurus, Jay Rose:

"It's dangerous to assume that an XLR plug or jack is balanced."

Run, don't walk, to his website at www.dplay.com and browse his tutorials... especially www.dplay.com/dv/balance/balance.html which is all about balanced vs. unbalanced audio, and where his quote comes from. Hope this helps,

> Sorry to sound uninformed but I'm new to this stuff-- so the MA-100 is unbalanced?

The MA-100 has balanced input, unbalanced output, and it is an all-solid state design (no transformers), which is fine because the audio inputs of the XL1 are unbalanced. The outputs of the Beachtek and Studio One are also unbalanced,

XLR connectors usually imply balanced systems, but as Chris posted there maybe exceptions. Also you can buy xlr-to-RCA or XLR-to-phone adapters that just unbalance the XLR connection by strapping one side to ground rather than converting from balanced to unbalanced. They tend to be low cost, often under $10.

Similarly when you see a "stereo-phone" or mini-phone jack it often is a stereo signal, especially with consumer gear. But it could be balanced mono, or it could be a unbalanced send/return from a mixer/amlifier to an audio signal processor of some sort. Consider the mini-phone output of some wireless mic receivers which is a balanced mono signal.

Hi All,

I have bought a ma100 mic adaptor and I use a sennheiser k6/me66 with xlr sockets.

I notice the 2 sockets on the ma100 are labelled L and R and I only receive audio on one or the other. How do I use ma100 *and* receive audio thru' both channels?

TIA

D

Well, the Senn K6 is an excellent mic, and like all other professional mics, it's monophonic. If you want to feed it to both L & R inputs on the MA100, all you need to do is get a "Y" splitter cable that has a single XLR input at one end and two XLR outputs at the other, and plug it into your MA100.

Be advised though that all you'd be doing is feeding the exact same mono signal to both channels... it will not be "stereo" which is what I think you might be looking for.

The best way to do a stereo feed through the MA100 is with two professional XLR mics, of which you already have one. One mic for the left channel and another for the right.

Most folks are using the MA100 to feed the audio from, say, a wireless lav into one channel and another external mic like your Senn K6 to the other channel. Hope this helps,

Chris, thanks very much...a very simple subject I'm sure...but only when you understand it and now I think I do.

Cheers

D

Here's a caveat--

For all of you that use this adapter, I found out (the hard way) that the MA-100 will go into hard limit with a fairly low-level signal. I was feeding the ouput from my Mackie mixer into the MA-100 so I as to be "XLR" all the way. (I was mixing 3 mikes.) Since then, I've switched to using the unbalanced RCA jack tape output from the mixer, directly into the XL-1 RCA jacks.

It's possible to feed line-level audio to the MA-100, but levels are critical. Use an oscilloscope to verify the limit threshhold.

I think that the MA-100 is doing it's job OK -- I was just pushing it a little beyond its capabilities.

Since the above occurred, I now use the adapter only for mics, along with an in-series phantom power box.

Cheers, Vic

Hi Vic,

This might be another of my "dumb" questions, but did you have the input level on your XL1 set to mic by any chance? I've used a Mackie with the MA200 without any noticable problem. I have the Mackie 1402-VLZ Pro which can output either +4 or mic levels on the XLR Main Outs. I normally use the +4 setting with the XL1 set to receive line level signals.

Works for me.

Ed Frazier

Hi Ed--

I experimented with all of the settings on the XL-1. My problem was hard limiting coming out of the MA-100, before it got to the XL-1. I use a Mackie 1202, and other than the MA-100 problem, it works fine. I picked up a 10 ft dual stereo cable with RCA plugs on each end, and as mentioned, I don't use the MA-100 with the mixer. In this mode, I use the Line level input setting on the XL-1.

I used a Beachtek adapter when I was using my Sony D-8, but with the RCA jacks on the Canon, there hasn't been the need.

Cheers, Vic

Vic,

Since I'm preparing for a shoot that calls for a sound person with a mixer (probably a boom and two RFs) - what you suggest is important to me since I doubt the sound man (or woman) will be familiar with the XL-1. If I understand correctly you are suggesting we by-pass the XLR connector(s) alltogether and plug the UNBALANCED and unshielded output of whatever mixer is being used directly into the XL1's RCA connectors?

Can you tell me a little more about the problem you encountered using the M100. Isn't the M100 a passive connector? If so, how can it be limiting the sound in any way?

I also have a Beachcraft (I'm sure I have the name wrong) XLR to RCA converter that has a toggle for MIC and AUX and two pots for the output. Would that be a better option?

There's a piece of your problem I'm not understanding.

Hi, Ozzie--

Actually, the MA-100 is not passive -- that's where the problem lies. The extra cord that plugs into the XL-1 provides power to the unit. The amp inside the MA-100 is apparently designed for mic-level inputs, or at the most very low inputs. If I have the output LEDS on my Mackie flickering above the first one or two, the MA-100 goes into hard limit.

This is all manageable if one checks everything out ahead of time with an oscilloscope to learn where the problem points begin. I found it easier, however, to not feed the MA-100 when using the mixer, and go directly to the XL-1.

With a sound guy in tow, it becomes more manageable, but doing it all alone gets a little too busy....I can screw up enough things without the extra worry!

I believe the Beachtek would be a better choice with a mixer if you want to stay XLR all the way.

Hope this helps...

Cheers, Vic

Thank you for the good advice. I will use the Beachtek instead of the M100. Since the camera will be on sticks it'll be no problem inserting the Beechtek between the camera and the tripod head. By the way, I have noticed the hard limiting with the M100 but always attributed it to the AGC or limiter in the XL1.

There's a lot of experimenting ahead. Fortunately we don't shoot until April.

PS - I notice your "real" job is with the FAA. My slip before calling the "Beachtek" a "Beechcraft" has a lot to do with me owning a Beechcraft Sierra. But that's for another forum.

Yeah, the Beachtek units are great--I have one that I used on my Sony D-8. I've been tempted to get the one for the Canon.

I messed up a shoot discovering the problem with using the MA-100. During later troubleshooting, I "teed" the cables into the XL-1 so I could hang an oscilloscope on the cords--I was amazed at how little it took to get into limit. Live and learn.....

The MA-100 works great with mikes, but quite often I either use my Mackie, or take a feed of the house board.

Yep, the Sierra is a great little bird--we'll have to chat sometime. I manage the air traffic systems at Sea-Tac. Been kind of a zoo since 9/11 -- especially for the VFR stuff in the Class B airspace.

Cheers, Vic

Hi Vic,

I've been following this thread with interest since much of my audio comes from either my 1402 or a house board. I don't have a scope to analyze the signal (or would know what to look for) so have to rely on my ears, but here are my subjective test results.

Mackie Setup (audio signal from CD player):

CD line out connected to 1402 Channels 1 & 2 line in with RCA to 1/4" cables
Channel trims adjusted per Mackie instructions (very important step according to Mackie)
Ch1 panned full left
Ch2 panned full right
Both Channel Faders set to Unity Gain
Main Mix out set to Unity Gain
XLR Main out set at +4 and connected to MA200
Tape Out RCAs connected to XL1S Audio 2 RCA inputs
1402 leds hovering around 0 and peaking at +7 (no yellows)

XL1S/MA200 Setup:

Audio set to 12 bit St1-St2
Audio 1 set to line level and receiving input from MA200 XLRs
Audio 2 set to line level and receiving input directly from 1402 Tape Out RCA jacks
AGC was set to both Auto and Manual settings during test
Audio was monitored with headphones at camera

Results:

Using the audio select button on the XL1S, I switched between Audio 1 and 2 with the only noticable difference being a slightly brighter sound on Audio 1. Switching both Audio 1 and 2 to Manual mode, I was able to get the same levels on the XL1S meter with the manual level controls set just slightly above mid point. XL1S meter peaking at -2.

I noticed no apparent distortion or clipping on either Audio 1 or 2 with the above settings.

My question is; Should I be able to hear the "hard limit" condition that you describe? I did push the 1402 Main Mix above Unity Gain and did begin to notice some distortion on the XLR (Audio 1) input, more so than on Audio 2, but Mackie does warn that levels above +7 will likely distort. It doesn't sound like you were anywhere near that though. Since I'm using the MA200 is it likely that Canon made some changes to correct the condition you describe?

Thanks,
Ed Frazier

Ed,

Good write-up describing your set-up. It sounds like the MA-200 might be responding a little differently than the 100. When the output LEDs on my Mackie hit the half-way point to "0" (-4 or so), the MA-100 will start to limit. The Mackie output looks good all the way up to the yellow LED, so it's not the mixer. I can feed a "hotter" signal directly to the XL-1 using an unbalanced cable, and not experience any distortion.

Part of this problem lies in what I'm shooting -- live theater typically has massive level changes, e.g., quiet dialog punctuated with yells, screams, applause, accompanists that think they're the "show", etc. With a sound guy on top of the situation, it would be easier to manage, but I'm busy enough just dealing with just the major contrast changes that occur from the lights.

If the MA-100 was a passive device, like the Beachtek or Studio One, this likely wouldn't occur. And, as I mentioned earlier, I'm also probably not using the MA-100 as intended, since with mikes it's works great (minus the phantom power, though).

I'd like to play around with the MA-200 sometime--it appears to be a 100 on steroids! And, maybe the active components have greater dynamic range.

Sounds like your set-up works for you--I wouldn't change it based on my experience.

Cheers, Vic

Vic,

I'm curious about one aspect of your setup. Using unbalanced and usually unshielded cables are prone to two things - hum from any AC line crossing the cables and cable length limitations. What are you doing to minimize any or both of these problems? I can't predict how far from the XL-1 the sound guy will be but it will usually not be more than 30 to 50 feet. But there will invariably be any number of AC sources along the way.

Well Guys, I should have done more testing before posting my last. While the audio sounded good, when loaded into Premeire the clipped amplitude on audio 1 was very apparent even with the limited waveform displayed there.

The solution, at least with the small Mackie mixers, is set the output to "mic" level and you can still use balanced lines. I did another quick test with the same setup as described above but with the mixer XLR main out set to mic level. I changed audio 1 input level to mic and again compared the waveforms in Premeire. They were identical.

So with that said, it looks like the MA100 and MA200 behave exactly the same, and as you said Vic, are designed for mic level inputs only.

Thanks for pointing that out.

Ed Frazier

These boards, set-up by Chris, are amazingly active! I wish I'd discovered them before--great stuff!

Ed, I think it's all manageable, once you're aware of the limitations. A crew helps, but I'm a small operation, so the budget has its limitations. Maybe, when I retire from the FAA, I can get "big".....Ha! Glad this was a good heads-up for you.

Ozzie, you're right about the unbalanced line--I'm only using 10' and I'm real careful about the AC cords for the camera, etc. Much longer than that I'd prefer to use the balanced XLR, thus the need for the Beachtek or equiv.

Experimentation in a quiet environment helped me a lot, but I'm sure you've been there many times before.

I've also enjoyed your responses on this board--it's comforting to know that even the "pros" ask questions.

Cheers, Vic

>>it's comforting to know that even the "pros" ask questions<<

Pros are asking questions because it's a rapidly changing world and we need to keep up. Just this morning I had a chat with my business partner -- "Who will we hire to work the XL1?" he asked. "No one. I'm working the camera." "You'll get burned out. We're shooting for twelve days." What he really meant, besides burning out, was 'you're not a camera operator... not really' " Well, I am a camera operator who's been a director for too long. Besides, where will we find an operator that has spent the holidays on this board getting great advice from everyone? I doubt any of our usual sound people will know about the M100 problem. It's too specific a problem.

The "system" is geared for your standard big crew -- i.e. Director; Camera/DP; AC; Sound mixer; sound assist; Art Director; Key grip; 2 grips; AD; PA; script; and a gaggle of PAs. As budgets go down we need to keep production quality up. Among other things, the crew is being reduced to - Director/camera/DP; AC; Grip; script; PA.

We're in an interesting situation - "consumer" became "prosumer" and now the "pros" are turning "prosumer" to just "pro". The quality coming out of 3 chip cameras is almost as good as any BetaSP if shot with care. The manufacturers keep the cost down by not supplying SMPTE time code and SMPTE bars. They also need to protect their professional division from the consumer division. But the pros need to keep pushing the envelope. As a result we now have a hires view finder for the XL1 and better optics. Canon, Panasonic and Sony are very responsive to market demands. It's people like us in this board that need to keep raising the bar. After all it wasn't ordinary consumers that created the demand for a hires viewfinder.

The same thing is happening in the post field. We have three Avids in operation. The oldest one cost us $80,000 and became obsolete (hardware and software) within two years. The newer Avids cost us a bundle and their proprietary codexes drive us nuts. Along comes Apple with Final Cut Pro. I saw the first version at a convention years ago and I thought it was "interesting" but not for us "pros." Well, now we have Final Cut Pro v3 that rivals Avid in most respects and costs less than $1000! AND it can run on any G4 or iMac! (Avid will support only the exact system it sells you. Add anything and support is gone.) FC Pro also has a compression scheme that allows up to 40 minutes of material in just one gig! I can off-line a feature in my Powerbook! The question now is - where will we find a good Final Pro editor? Most of the good Avid editors were good film editors before that. They just had to learn the system. Why not learn another, simpler, system? Editing is editing no matter what the system.

All this boggles the mind. When I first started editing it was in a room with two Quad playback VTRs and one record Quad. That was three operators plus me - the AD/Editor. It was noisy and each VTR cost upwards of $150,000. The 2" tape stock cost about $90 for a 60 min reel. I'm not even mentioning how much it cost for the three operators and a maintenance engineer.

My reply is a bit long-winded I'm afraid. I'm just very happy for the kind of people that visit this board. It's not an overstatement to say it's places like DViCommunity that are disseminating the type of information and fostering the enthusiasm that's changing the way the industry does business. Just when we thought we knew it all, there's a whole new challenge. Great!

Vic,

I've been talking with a sound guy who's done a good deal of sound work with MiniDV. His suggestion is to RF the signal from the mixer to a receiver on the XL-1 and then go directly into the Beachteck (or M100 if it accepts line input which it doesn't). This sounds like the best way to get around the unshielded cable problem. I still will monitor the sound off the XL1's headset output.

My tests indicate that the MA-100 will start to clip if the input signal (voltage applied between pins 2 and 3 of the XLR jack) goes above about -7 dBV.

Allowing for headroom, it sould be uised with mic level signals. In the case of typical mixers, use the mic (e.g., -30 dBV) output setting.

In many environments a -30 dBV balanced signal at 600 ohms will be a better audio signal choice than -10 dBV unbalanced at 47 k ohms.

That's good additional info--I never put an audio level meter on the input, only observed the output with an o-scope.

I suppose it's all "doable" with the MA-100, but I've gotten gun-shy after getting nailed during a one-time shoot. (I wish my ears were as accurate as the scope.)

Maybe I need Ozzie's sound guy.......!

Vic

I just received the MA-100 and Sennheiser ME66 mic with K6 power supply. I bought a 15' XLR cable from Radio Shack and put them all together and it did not work. It didn't work whether I disconnected the onboard mic or not.

Please help!

Update---

I put up the volume and checked all the settings and made sure the Menu settings had MIC on it also - It works on Audio 1 only and it is very very low. The onboard mic that came with the camera is 30x louder than my ME66 connected to the MA-100!

Any ideas on this problem? I'm going to need to use it very soon!

Be sure you set the Input Select switch behind the audio controls door on the left side of the camera to Audio 1. Also, be sure the MA-100 power is plugged into the DC out terminal and the RCA connectors from the MA-100 are plugged into the Audio 1 terminals, not Audio 2. Set Audio 1 Record Level if you are not using AGC.

Check the battery in the K6 and make sure the power switch is on.

When the Input Select switch is in the Audio 1 position, the onboard mic is disconnected so it will make no difference whether it is connected or not.

You have probably already checked all this but it wouldn't hurt to go over all the settings again. You have most likely just overlooked something.

Ed Frazier

It sounds like you've checked to make sure the Audio One IN menu is in MIC, not LINE or ATT 20, and that you have Audio 1 selected. I also presume you've checked both channels. So....

I'd suggest either going to a camera store that carries mics, or one where they sell musical instruments, and either trying another mic, or trying your mike on one of the store mixers -- most musical instrument stores have a Mackie or something similar set up, and usually have lots of various mics.

I haven't used the Senn -- does it require phantom power other than the K6?

I know that 'panic feeling.....best of luck.

Vic

I believe I got it to work - Thanks for your help.

But the onboard mike still sounds louder than my ME66. I have to speak directly into the ME66 to hear it. Maybe it's because of my cheap headphones? But I hear the onboard one fine.

This is important because I'm filming durning Carnaval next month in Trinidad and I want to be sure I'm picking up the sounds of the crowd and all. I'm planning on purchasing the lightwave equalizer windscreen.

Any thoughts?

The on-board Mic on the XL-1 is an amazing device and I'm always amazed at its pickup. I've used both Peavey super- cardioid and Shure PZM mics and they both sound pretty good without having the sound source right on top of the mic. It might do you well to compare to some others. It doesn't sound like a headphone issue to me. In my experience, the Canon mic is slightly louder than the externals, but not dramatically so. Keep in mind, though, that the Senn is more of a shotgun pattern than the Canon -- that might make a little difference, but it shouldn't make a lot.

Vic

I work with the Sennheiser comination and it works quite good. But I only use it for interviews. For all the rest the Canon mic is enough.

Just a comment on the windscreen: Check out
www.vas-online.de

They have a simple windscreen for XL-1 that costs around 40 € and works great.


Markus

For specific XL-1 issues, it's hard to find a better place than right here. However, there is a lot of pretty good general information regarding audio, mics, etc. on the DV Magazine forums. The Audio Solutions forum is moderated by Jay Rose, who also writes the audio column for the rag.

Check: http://www.dv.com/db_area/cgi-bin/Ultimate.cgi

Vic

I just ordered an onboard video monitor and it looks as if it uses the same Yellow, White and Red cords that the MA-100 I have uses. How can I get both to work together?

You probably don't need to feed audio to an onboard video monitor, so if I were you, I wouldn't connect the audio cables. If you really want to, then connect them to the jacks on the back of the camera, and plug the MA-100 audio cables into the second set of RCA jacks on the right side rear of the camera handle.

There's no yellow video cable on the MA-100. There is on the MA-200, though. You'll have to decide if you want to cable to your monitor from the back of the MA-200 or the back of the camera; it's up to you. Hope this helps,

The only reason you might want to connect audio cables into the LCD monitor is to listen to audio on its crummy little speaker while in playback. Otherwise, stay on the headphones and don't use the LCD audio feature--save the jacks for your MA-100.

BTW, it would have been nice if Canon had made the MA-100 cords removable so it wasn't necessary for everything to be hooked up when all you needed was a better shoulder mount.

Vic