Hello,

I am looking at this camera and the only thing holding me back is the rear zoom control. I love my broadcast zoom controller with a broadcast lens and I don't want to give that up, but the XF300 uses LANC. So how good or bad is it? How much of a step down from a broadcast zoom controller would it be?

I know this varies with different LANC controllers but if users who have used both could weigh in I would appreciate your experiences.

Thanks

I had a varizoom for my panny which worked very well. When I got my xf300, the same style controller was available so I got it. Huge disappointment! Lagged terribly and drifted. Ended up getting the Canon lanc controller (I think it's the 1000 model) and it works very well. Other than being plastic, too expensive and the cord a bit too short, it's probably the best for the camera.

All that said, it's nothing like a broadcast lens controller! I wish it was as I've used a few back in the old days. Night and day!

Don't expect lanc to be anything like the broadcast controllers and you will be happy.

I've just started using the Manfrotto 521PROi LANC controller with my XF300. It's very good and produces really smooth start/stop zooms.

I use the LIBEC. Works well.

Don't expect lanc to be anything like the broadcast controllers and you will be happy.

Thanks for your input. Sadly, this kind of takes this level of camera off of my list. I know some do not use controllers very much for their work but I have always seen a good controller a tool for artisic expression. It is shame to pass over such a great camera for one reason alone.

That sound kind of severe.
I suggest that you try the system out with a borrowed camera some time - you might be pleasantly surprised...

I will try to find the Manfrotto controller you mentioned and give it a shot. Do you know if the XF300 offer any other functions through rear control like iris or focus?

I agree that you should give it a try. The camera's really the best in it's price range. The Canon controller is quite useable. I'd imagine the Manfrotto and Libec are too. My comment was just in comparison to the broadcast controllers ive used on lenses costing 3-4 times what the xf300 costs.

Zoom iris and focus plus start/stop are on most of the controllers. They all treat them differently. The varizoom had the best layout which is why I was bummed mine didn't work. I may have gotten a bad copy. Had a shoot and didn't have time to deal with it. I will contact varizoom to see what they say.

Thanks. The large camera/small camera situation is always on my mind. I prefer a lot of shooting environments with larger cameras with the better controls but the small cameras are looking so good these days that their size holds a lot of positives. But, I know I would miss the high end controllers no matter how good the XF300's LANC is implemented.

Update: I went to a local vendor and tried the XF300 today. To make a long story short I will be selling my EX-1 and getting an XF300 and probably an XF100 along with it.

The zoom control is quite good for a small camera. I would say it is about 2/3"s of a broadcast lens in terms of control. Slow starts and creeps are easy to do. It is just not as quick and responsive as a large lens but for the price is a great value.

So my fears have been proven wrong and kudos to Canon for making such a refined product.

I tested the camera in 720p60 and compared the f-stops to my EX-1 in store. The EX-1 was at f2.8 and the XF300 was at f2.4 Close enough for me to call them equal for sensitivity in 720p. I did not compare 1080p.

What is sealing the deal for me is handholding. The XF300 has all of the weight mid to front where you hand hold these cameras. The EX-1 has all of the weight in the back. I found the camera very easy to keep steady and pretty comfortable to hold using the excellent viewfinder.