Ok, I need some advice. If I let you know what I foresee myself shooting can you help recommending between these 2? I'm sure the XF100 will be fine for now, but I'm very new to this all but want to grow and don't want to be in a position where I HAVE to upgrade.

Main uses
1. on the water sailing footage.
2. on shore boat setup footage
3. indoor and outdoor training clinic/lecture footage
4. Run-and-gun interviews at regattas
5. corporate videos (tours of facilities...)

Less often uses
1. weddings (mostly only people I know)
2. Ballet recitals (teacher said if i shoot some behind the scenes and event stuff we can barter for my daughters classes:-)

I'm really being drawn to this camera due to the size (I'll not only be in tight spaces but also traveling quite a bit.) I also like the solid state recording. I just don't know what I would ever plug into the genlock and HDSD-SDI ports. I'll spend the extra $k but if i don't have to... that's a good tripod.

Also, what is the expected life of a camera like this one? I've been looking at classifieds and everyone asks hours. Does that matter with a Solid State Media camera?

Thanks!

Hi Paul, in environments with lots of salt water/spray the life of the cam might not be that long - if this is sea sailing - so maybe go for the cheaper XF100 - and even then protect it and clean it often!

Get the 105 if you need to do 3D or you want to record to even a higher codec......otherwise, get the 100

Jim Martin
FilmTools.com

Paul I too am pretty new to this but when I was getting my XF300 the guy at the dealers said if you don't really plan to do much studio shooting or have loads of peripherals attached then don't bother with the 05 and get the cheaper 00.

Thanks guys. I think I'll be fine with the XF100. For what I'm planning, I don't see needing a higher codex or attaching much to it other then a wireless mic but that would go to the XLR's anyway. I really don't see doing 3d. If I ever did plan to do any of that... I'd be making more then enough to get a different camera. The new ones would be out by then anyway.

I appreciate the info.

I don't see why anyone would need more than the 50mbps, 4:2:2 codec, at least for normal usage. That's why I went with the XF305 over a Sony EX1R/3. I wanted that codec!

Hey Paul,

To be honest, couldn't you save even more and get the XA10 as it sounds like you don't need the codec improvement and it's basically the same camera inside other than that? Just protect it even more as it's not as robust as the XFs.

Gary.

I had thought of that, but I got away from the XA10 for a few reasons. Let me know if my thinking's off.

1. I am learning and the XF100 is a Pro Camera with similar controls to other pro cameras. I feel that the skills/knowledge i learn on that one will translate better to other equipment in the future.

2. For the foreseeable future this will be my only camera. I do not want to be in a situation where I need more the the XA10 can give.

3. Quality of the build. I've been reading a lot that says the XF is just a better built camera

4. I've had REAL bad luck with internal HD camera's in the past going bad and loosing files. I know that I could back up onto SD cards, but why would I want to pay for something that I really don't want when you know other things were sacrificed to have the Hard Drive in there and still keep the price reasonable.

5. I think it's just a bit too small.

And on the XA10 you don't have the full control on the pictures presets and setting you have on the XF

Fair enough, I agree actually now that I know what you're after. Although the XA10 isn't a hard drive cam as far as I know, it's internal flash memory, which I've never had a problem with. Plus I think it's got SD card slots if you want to use those.

So, as long as I can get it in writing/contract I've got a gig that's paying for most of this camera! Rather then start a new thread, I'm wondering what else I just HAVE to have to make this work.

The gig is shooting 22 lacrosse games for a local high school. (I'm a sailor and will specialize in that but this is some easy money and experience.) They want the game filmed and footage burned to DVD for the coach. I'll be financing the gear so here's what I think I need. Let me know if there's anything I'm missing.

Canon XF-100
2x Sandisk Extreme Pro 32gb Compactflash cards.
Manfrotto 504HD Head w/546B tripod (or similar)
an extra battery
a UV filter
a polarized filter
a Camera Case
a rain slicker for the camera.
and possibly a Lectrosonics 100 series set of transmitter, receiver, and lavaliere mic.

Any further advice? Know anywhere I can get this all together and save a few bucks? B&H has good prices, but I was wondering if I can get some kind of package deal since i need it all.

Thanks!

Paul sorry to disrupt things but have you looked at the JVC HM100? From what I can gather it's a very good camera and gets good reviews. On the face of it it looks pretty similar to the XF100 but lower codec.

... Much worse low light than the XF100.

I don't see why anyone would need more than the 50mbps, 4:2:2 codec, at least for normal usage. That's why I went with the XF305 over a Sony EX1R/3. I wanted that codec!

I have a question. With the XF100 could you use a nanoFlash via the HDMI and get a higher bitrate codec?

This is somewhat academic, the 50mbs 4:2:2 codec is perfectly fine for me and I have an XF100 ordered, but I am curious about whether the HDMI port could be used, and what the tradeoffs might be.

Canon XF-100
2x Sandisk Extreme Pro 32gb Compactflash cards.
Manfrotto 504HD Head w/546B tripod (or similar)
an extra battery
a UV filter
a polarized filter
a Camera Case
a rain slicker for the camera.
and possibly a Lectrosonics 100 series set of transmitter, receiver, and lavaliere mic.


I would skip the polarized filter, you can't operate it with the lens hood and it's of little use I think. Only if you're filming behind glass you may need one to reduce reflections.

In stead, you might need one or two ND filters. There were some reporting problems with the ND filter of the XF300, the XF100 may suffer from the same.

You may want to add a shotgun mic, if they value sound enough that you need lavaliere I suppose they also value sound for the field.

You may need to add the attachable teleconverter to your kit. For field sports the 10x zoom may not be enough.

Shooting sports, in particular with a large field, I think is tricky with only one camera. You need to be well above ground, and you might actually need two cams to cover the field unless you're a good steady runner. But, I suppose the coach is not after TV style sport report but rather the overview for tactical studies.

Not that I have any experience in the above, just my is it 5 cents now?

BR, Erik

Thanks man!!! That's a big help. To clarify 2 a few things. 1 the Lav. wasn't for this gig, it's for my lecture series gig figured i'd get them together. With regard to the zoom... I'll be in the press stand, shooting half the field at a time since they want to see the whole field of play... with that said, is the 10x enough?

thanks for the filter advice!

... Much worse low light than the XF100.
I would love to see a side by side test of the XF100 and JVC HM100. I don't doubt you are right I would just like to know by how much. I shoot for special interest/enthusiast DVD etc of planes and trains so I'm not sure if it would be as critical as it might be for some uses.

There's a shoot out here between the xf100 and the JVC and a mini Sony.

The Iris Mag - Edition 3 (http://www.theirismag.com/irisonline/edition3/) Takes a minute to load.

JVC comes last, due to it being "too contrasty". Still a good camera though, but Canon have had a couple of years to improve on it. If you're a FCP user it's worth remembering that the JVC produces Q-Times out of the camera, so there's none of the tedious ProRes transcoding malarky you get with many camcorders these days.

The XF wins the shoot-out even though it is the priciest camera on test. The Sony comes second due to its significantly lower price to the other two. The JVC comes last because it's been superseded by a better camera that is only a little more expensive.

Makes you realise what a cracking little camera the HM100 has been for the last couple of years. And still is. It'll be interesting to see what JVC replace it with.

Thanks for the link Dom. Interesting mag.

I hope I don't drag this thread in the wrong direction here but....for me there are two choices.

a) Keep my XF300 and downgrade my photography gear to fun an XF100
b) Sell the XF300, keep the pro photography gear I have now and get an XF100 to replace the XF300

It all comes down to needing a camcorder AND stills camera that I can easily take hand luggage on a plane. I can't take my current Canon 1DmkIV AND the XF300. But is having an XF300 and XF100 just kind of doubling up?

Don't know what work you do Andy, but the thing about little cameras for me, is that clients may think you're not a pro, even though the new Canon xf100 is pretty high end. If they saw you with a Z1 they'd think you're a pro, but not the XF100. It's very annoying, because as we all know, this little cam is light years ahead of a Z1, but for a lot of clients size matters in my experience.

Without knowing your work, i couldn't advise you on which camera to part with. I think if your work doesn't require a large camera, sell the xf300 to fund the 100. If it does, sell the stills camera, or else go without the 100.

Dom I'll admit that I don't currently have any regular work, I am in the process of setting up to do special interest programs mainly for DVD. I mean things like aviation, rail etc. I got the XF300 for low light and the 18x zoom which is useful for filming planes in flight. The problem is taking the XF300 out of the UK is not very easy with airline carry-on bag size restrictions and I thought the XF100 would provide a good alternative cam for when I have to travel, which I do quite a bit. I could just about take the XF300 on it's own but if I need to take stills as well I can't pack my DSLR + lenses as well. Plus I'm just not sure for the stills part of my work I really need a camera as good as the 1DmkIV.

Andy S

Hi Paul,
I'm also considering an XF to upgrade from a 7D, so this is a great thread.

Manfrotto 504HD Head w/546B tripod (or similar)

I bought a Libec fluid head which comes with the tripod after seeing one in the field. You will be really happy with the smoothness, and need to be sure to get the correct size for the weight you will be using. I met a videographer in the field who has a Manfrotto fluid head and compared. His was quite jerky by comparison. My fluid head usage is smooth pans for nature.

I'm wondering if there is a camera (aside from the DSLRs) that can take an EF100-400mm or EF500mm lens?

Regards,
Doug.

Andy,

Have you tried a hard peli style case? I have a Storm case, and you can get a fair amount in it. Since you'll be carrying it by hand you don't need to allow that much packing foam round the edges. I think you can get an aeroplane friendly case for your needs with a bit of creativity. Though some airlines are more fussy than others.

The stills camera you have is super high end. If you don't need such an expensive camera you could trade it in for an xf100 and a cheaper stills camera. There are loads of outstanding stills camera's for reasonable prices, especially if you buy used.

If video is your focus, then that's where your cash should be IMO. And you'll find a small camera is often a lot more useful than a big one.

Good luck with your shopping.

I had a look at Peli cases but I really need a backpack style so that I can carry gear. When shooting at airports I don't usually rent a car and just walk around but it can be several miles a day.


What I was thinking was sell the 1DmkIV for around £2800. Buy an XF100 at about £2500 then get a second-hand Canon 7D for about £800. That means an outlay of £500 but then I would have a decent DSLR plus two great video cameras that can adapt well to travel and shooting at home.

The 1DmkIV seems excessive now. At the time I bought it as part of my new business but trying to make any money at all off transport type stills images is next to impossible. Video seems much more likely. There are quite a few people selling that type of DVD so with some hard work I think it might just be possible.

Great discussion, just wanted to point out that the
XF305 and XF105 are primarily for SDI connectivity.
If you're not using SDI now (or if you don't know
what SDI is), then there's no compelling reason to
buy the 305 or 105. Unless you're buying two cams
for 3D setups... then you would really benefit from
the GenLock feature. Otherwise, go for the much
less expensive 300 or 100 (or XA10, as mentioned).

We got an XF305 & XF105 not because we currently need SDI but in an attempt to future proof the cameras as SD gives us the option of adding a Nanoflash recorder at a later date. As it turns out the Atomos Ninja may do the same job at less than half the price & via HDMI rather than SDI so could be used with the XF100/XF300. As the Ninja records direct to ProRes it should speed up editing too.

so can we hear some thoughts from some of the first buyers?

so can we hear some thoughts from some of the first buyers?I have just moved in to a new house & have 1001 things to do so have barely had time to play with the XF105. My first impressions are that it is just like a baby XF305. The ergonomics are great everything falls to hand as it should with the buttons & knobs in just the right place. The single zoom/iris/focus ring is if anything an advantage versus 3 separate ones as it's harder to use the wrong one in the heat of the moment. It's small, light & very portable. Anyone who is used to using a Canon Pro camcorder e.g. XH-A1, XF305 etc will feel immediately at home. The video of course is superb. I am sure that if I shot test cards it wouldn't be as good as the XF305 but from my brief casual use the video is indistinguishable. As with the XF305 the picture is detailed with very natural colours straight out of the box with default settings.