Ok, you guys tell me if I'm being too picky here. I'm still getting to know this camera and some of the things that have been omitted are really annoying considering the level that this camera is designed for. I just realized that there are no zoom power numbers, just a bar with an indicator. I looked through the manual and couldn't find any reference to how to get the actual zoom magnification to show up. This is something I use quite a bit on my little Panasonic HDC-TM90. I shoot mostly horses and I often setup a baseline where I'll be most of the time, then if I zoom in or out, I know what number to go back to. Seems like most of the things people are finding need improvement are things that could easily be fixed with a firmware upgrade. It almost feels like they did it on purpose just to be able to say later, "Look at all the stuff we gave you in the new firmware."

I did edit some stuff from the camera in Premiere Pro CC last night. I was really happy with it. Much better dynamic range that the little Panasonic.

Bob

Auto power off was needed with tape camcorders for three reasons: head wear in pause, tape wear in pause, and the increased use of power by motors when they are running. These issues are gone with tapeless systems. Auto focus, stabilization, and zoom notors use power when acutally in use. There is some increased use of power during recording due to increased DSP and write loads (as is the case with any computer).

I suspect that for most people the savings with a sleep mode would be probably be small compared to the convenience of having near instant on recording. More people complained about the auto shut off with tape camcorders than have complained about it being missing on tapeless machines.

I got to play with the XA20 today. Sweet camera. I'm going to like this over my HV30 and XH-A1.

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a35/decraig2000/IMG_20130803_140808_993_20130803143433012_zps47f74dfd.jpg (http://s8.photobucket.com/user/decraig2000/media/IMG_20130803_140808_993_20130803143433012_zps47f74dfd.jpg.html)

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a35/decraig2000/IMG_20130803_140824_303_20130803143330858_zps9748c485.jpg (http://s8.photobucket.com/user/decraig2000/media/IMG_20130803_140824_303_20130803143330858_zps9748c485.jpg.html)

Congrats Derek!

I totally agree the XA-20 is a fine camera. Right out of the box we were able to obtain an outstanding quality clean clear image.
.
Our camera arsenal here at Kato Video Production includes the following Ex-1-R Ex-3 and PMW 320.
We had never compared any other cameras to our Xdcam cameras until now.

Wow! I was really taken back after looking at the initial clips before we did any tinkering. My
Ex-1R looked sick up beside the XA 20. The canon was much warmer, had more contrast and much cleaner image than the EX-cameras. The image quality or "look" of a camera is very subjective and what might look good to me might not to another person. However, the "look" of this little camera was very pleasing. So Pleasing that we are now tinkering with the XDCAM cameras trying to find profiles that would give us more contrast and a warmer cleaner image as the XA20. We are currently using Doug Jensen's Doug 1 profile and have been pleased with the results.

Here is the set up that we are using at the present after our initial tests.

Shutter -Pri- 60 AE
White balance auto

focus manual peaking on I will probably turn this off it gives the view finder a red tint.

Image effects: sharpness -1, Brightness 0,contrast -1, color depth +1

auto gain limit 9 db actually running in the auto position.

iris auto

image stabilizer dynamic

focus manual: actually I toggle the auto on first then change to manual with peaking and focus assist then leave it at manual.

face tracking off

auto backlight correction on

ND filter on auto

movie format AVCHD
Recording mode 24 Mbps LPCM

Relay recording However, I may change this because
the 64 gig cards will run much longer than the batteries. I may change to dual recording.

frame rate 59.94i

DF/NDF DF setting

ND filter automatic

user output mode fixed

OLED color balance 0
OLED brightness bright.

auto white balance

We are more accustomed to cameras that have the major settings on the outside of the camera. However, the menu is easily accessible and there are buttons that can be programed to helpo some of the settings like white balance, iris, shutter speed and so on. We plan to use this camera in a run and gun method when setup is not an option. The OLED screen is outstanding and the menus are logically arranged to make going total manual easier than other small cameras we have used.

A couple other of findings is that the Hoodman Viewfinder hood that I have been using on the Ex1-r fits fine on the XA20 and makes manual focus much easier and helps in bright light.

Instead of trying to match the XA20 to the XDCAM cameras as we initially thought we are now looking for Picture profiles to match the XDCAM cameras to the XA20.

Don't get me wrong. We are not ready to ditch our Sony cameras. They have been workhorses and have never let us down with hundreds of hours of use in some very difficult shooting conditions.

We just discovered a little small camera that gives a look that we like.

We have looked high and low for picture profiles for the XDCAM cameras to give a more warm look and and more contrast to mimic the XA20 but have been unsuccessful.

If you know of a site that might help please send me the link

Thanks guys and gals for all the posts I have read on the forum. I have learned so much from your questions and answers.

Take care

Ronnie Martin
ronnievideo@aol.com

If I were to go this route I would have to op for the XA-25. Lots of gigs I go on want a SDI out. Even in live streaming.
What does the Standard def look like out of this camera, anybody know? That would be important to me as well.

In all of the 20 years or so of video production we have never had a request for SDI. I am sure that your
"gigs" are more technical more demanding and on a higher plane than ours. I really think the D 30 is a better buy price wise if you are looking for a small prosumer camera with a terrific image. All three cameras XA25/20 and G30 all have the same lens and sensor. The 20 and 25 both have the XLR imputs (which are removable)and the 25 has SDI out. All three have wifi function. I can see where for run and gun news gathering the 25 might be a a great buy when you consider the image quality and the price.

Thanks for your reply

Ronnie
Kato Video Priductions

I hear you Ronnie. but it's not the past 20 years I'm looking at.
SDI is the only way to feed HD signals long distances.

if you need it once that's. it.:: Why does an output cost more?

Why does an output cost more?

Can be drive by a number of factors, not the least of which are number of units they expect to sell with the added feature (different case, added jack, and circuit board perhaps) compared to the cost to implement it, the expected lifecycle maintenance/support cost of the unit with the added feature, and what the market is willing to pay.

On the average, units with SDI may be subject to more field use under rough conditions resulting in a higher warranty repair rate, which translates to higher warranty/support cost component in setting the final price.

SDI allows use of existing 75 ohm/BNC connector analog video cabling.

I hear you Ronnie. but it's not the past 20 years I'm looking at.
SDI is the only way to feed HD signals long distances.

if you need it once that's. it.:: Why does an output cost more?

I forgot to say that I already have the ATOMOS HDMI-HD-SDI converter .....still in the box. .

I assume it will do the same thing and work with all our cameras. We have not used it yet. It was won in a drawing at NAB.

Ronnie

What luck. Yes it will work with any camera.

Now if I could just have some "luck" is discovering a Picture Profile to make the Sony cameras match the
Canon XA20.
I have spent the past few days searching all the forums without success. I have a vector scope and wave form generator in my Edius editing software that I have been comparing the ex-1r/ex-3 to the XA20. We probablly won't use the Canon in a shoot with the Sonys. The XA20 will be used alone mainly during traveling. Since the Sony cameras are more neutral in their look, It may be easier to color correct them in post to match the look of the Canon.

I just wish I could make the Sonys look more like the Canon to start with..

If you know of a site or a PP that would give me more of the Canon image please let me know

Take care

Ronnie
ronnievideo@aol.com

Can someone confirm that the XA20 LANC control would use the same controller as Sony.

Thanks

LANC is a Sony standard that dates to the 1990s and designed to support to a variety of mostly consumer and prosumer gear including (but not limited to) VCRs and camcorders - it should work (but I have not tried an XA20 yet). However, it is quite possible that some, perhaps many, functions implemented in a given controller (Sony or other brand) are NOT implemented in the XA20 such as specific zoom speeds, play speeds, etc. as well as features that may not apply to a camcorder.

One would have to test the specific controller to see what is implemented, and what is not.

Thank you Don.

I had to buy a new controller when I got the AC90, Panasonic and Sony not compatible at all. I'm seriously looking at the XA20 to replace a Sony FX1000. I've been waiting for something to come out with a 20x zoom.....same as the FX. I'm just wondering how the XA will compare to the FX with low light wedding situations.

Don't know about the XA20/25 but my lanc controller I used on my Sony V1U worked fine with my Canon XA10 so my guess is it will work.

When I was buying my XA10 my internet research seemed to indicate Sony and Canon had common lanc protocol but that Panny was different.

Canon has a long history of using LANC dating back at least to the A1 Digital and L2 Hi8 camcorders. In fact a modified Sony LANC conroller (the RM90 ???), I forget the number) is used to program the internal settings of the XL1 (and likely several other Canons) such as back focus. Details are in the FSM. There are likely some old threads in the XL1 area on this subject.

As noted Panasonic and JVC did not support LANC, but had something sort of similar.

From memory, LANC is a Sony contol protocol and hardware spec that uses a 9600 bps serial data stream with a master-slave configuration, and an 8-byte data packet. The master sends out a stream of 8-byte data packets on the serial line and monitors the signal on the line line as well. Certain bits in the pack reflect status from the master. This can include current operating mode and time code (if implemented in the master). Other bits are available tor the slave (e.g., the controller) to send commands to the master by "pulling down" the appropriate bits. The master reads the command by observing which bits were pulled down. (If I recall correctly, LANC time code was sent every other frame.) Products like the Videonics AB-1 and Thumbs-up used LANC and LANC time code for near-frame accurate linear editing.

Thanks guys!

The XA20 is on the way. Should have it early next week. I plan on doing some test against the FX and AC90. If it holds up well it will be a keeper and the FX is gone to B&H used dept.

I ordered an XA-20 from BandH on Monday.

It arrived today.

This will compliment my Sony NX5U and Canon HV40 for weddings. I also use a Nikon V1 and Hero2 sometimes.

I think I'm going to really like having another 20x zoom camera. It's amazing how useful that can be, especially at weddings. Can't wait to test this out!

Tim, I like mine very much, it's growing on me. I like it's images better than the XA-10, they are more pleasing to me, but it is taking some getting used to, in order to white balance correctly.

Hi Jeff, I've seen some of your post regarding WB. I don't think this will affect me much. I very rarely WB whilst recording.

WB has always been a trouble area for me.....I'm just not schooled enough to know how to get good WB for the changing light conditions. I get my wife to hold up a white towel in the sanctuary before the ceremony starts to set the WB on all cams. If the lighting is different on the alter, I will set two WB so I can toggle to it when the B&G get up there. Is this not possible on the XA20?

I don't understand how one would set WB during the ceremony with out filling the lens with white anyway, so if this is what the XA20 can't do I don't think it will be a problem for me.

Glad to hear you are liking the PQ. I have always respected your opinions with cameras.

Hi Tim. Thanks for the kind words. I used to set WB as you do. It has been years since I've used that method. Funny, I'd forgotten about it. Maybe I should try it again.

Anyway, I set color temp manually. Filling the screen with white is often inaccurate for me, either too blue or too yellow for me, so I just do it manually.

Oh ok, I've never had a video cam with temp adjustments, well the GH2 but I don't use it as much as the video cams.

I can see where you would want to do that on the fly. So you trust what's on you cam monitor or do you use an off cam monitor?

Hi

I read that the upstart of the XA20/25 is pretty slow. I hae a Panasonic TM900 myself that starts almost immediate as you open the LCD screen. The TM900 alsohave some kind of faster startup modes selectable in the menues, but as it starts up so fast without this option, I havn't used it.

My question regarding the XA20/25 is: how long time does it take to start the camcorder?

Regards,

/Bo

I haven't measured it but I would say about three full seconds. That might not sound like much but I've completely missed shots because of it. I just leave the camera on now and it's not a big deal except for battery consumption. It's a very nice camera. I just put about 34 hours of recording time on it over the last four days and it did a very good job even in really low, pre-dawn, light.

Bob

It's very slow, I just checked and it took about 5 seconds. For wedding work, when in doubt, I close the LCD and leave the camera on. It does not drain the camera much to leave it on for 30 minutes. If 30 mins in standby uses more power than I can afford, I need to buy more batteries.

Speaking of battery's, I read a review on B&H that said the base plate has to be removed to change the battery. Is this true?

yes Tim, its the same as the xa10. its very inconvenient.

Speaking of battery's, I read a review on B&H that said the base plate has to be removed to change the battery. Is this true?

Depends on which baseplate and how you mount it. I use a Manfrotto 501 plate and I can mount it slightly forward so I can still release the battery but the front edge of the plate makes pushing the custom button next to the dial slightly more difficult than it is to begin with.

Bob

Bob is correct, but I find sliding the plate forward enough to release the battery makes using the exposure button/wheel very awkward. It is a lose lose proposition. I feel that Canon did not think this through. A large number of pros, particularly wedding shooters use 501 style heads, so this should have been addressed in the design.

Yep, mine are 501's.....sounds like some modification will need to be done on the plate for the XA20.

You can modify the 501/503/701 plate. I had the same problem with my HV30. The long plate made it impossible to remove the battery. I cut the plate down and drilled/tapped for a set screw to keep the plate from sliding on through when in my 503 and 701 HDV fluid heads.

If I think of it, I will take a photo of the one that I modified a few years back and still use on that HV30.

On my XA20 I slid the plate forward like the other guys suggested. It works, but I might go with my modified plate instead.

Rather than Canon addressing the issue, I'd like to see Manfrotto come out with a short version of the plate for small cameras. I think they would sell well.

Rather than Canon addressing the issue, I'd like to see Manfrotto come out with a short version of the plate for small cameras. I think they would sell well.

Good point. With pro video camera's getting smaller and smaller there's no need for the plates to be that big.

Here is the Manfrotto plate that I modified for my HV30 a few years back. I will probably use this on my XA20. Basically I put it in a vice and used an abrasive cut off wheel to cut it down to length.

In the top view, the bugger looking stuff that you see is an epoxy material that I gooped up to keep the 1/4-20 screw from falling out the end. I was going to TIG weld it shut but just never got around to it. The epoxy while not looking pretty has held fine for probably 5 years now.

In the bottom view, in the lower left you can see the set screw (the LENS arrow is pointing towards it). This set screw takes the place of stud section that is to the right edge and keeps the shoe from sliding right on through the fluid head. A lot of my video work is done high above the ground and the last thing I needed was my camera to slide right on through the video head and falling 20+ feet to Mother Earth.

Pretty simple modification really. It frees up the battery latch and gets the shoe away from the Custom Dial.

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a35/decraig2000/ManfrottoPlateModification_zps6b1240bf.jpg (http://s8.photobucket.com/user/decraig2000/media/ManfrottoPlateModification_zps6b1240bf.jpg.html)

Thanks Derek, I'm sure I will be doing something like that if I end up keeping the XA.

Derek, I think you are absolutely correct, the plates are the issue, and Manfrotto would do well to come up with a smaller plate. I agree it would probably sell well.

Anyway, I'm having several plates modified. I thought of it, but it seemed crazy till you posted your pics!

Modified a plate today for my XA20. I cut a 501 plate off at the pin. I also rounded the corner that rests against my palm when handholding because it dug in and became uncomfortable pretty quickly. Finally, I used a file to bring back the ramp so I can push the plate into my 701 head without having to push the release button. I forgot to pinch the front corners like the original; I might go back and do that this evening.

Bob

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3729/9511853342_1d51d0575a_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/hotbobs/9511853342/)
manfrotto 501 plate unmodified (http://www.flickr.com/photos/hotbobs/9511853342/) by Ranger_Bob (http://www.flickr.com/people/hotbobs/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7329/9511948256_14db4485c1_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/hotbobs/9511948256/)
modified plate (http://www.flickr.com/photos/hotbobs/9511948256/) by Ranger_Bob (http://www.flickr.com/people/hotbobs/), on Flickr

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5535/9509075455_e0bac17767_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/hotbobs/9509075455/)
Modified Manfrotto 501 plate mounted on XA20 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/hotbobs/9509075455/) by Ranger_Bob (http://www.flickr.com/people/hotbobs/), on Flickr

Jeff or anyone, have you figured out how high the gain can be set before the image starts to degrade?

Seems like the new cameras are doing something different when gain is added. The AC90 doesn't seen to add much noise but the image just starts to degrade when you get over 20db or so. Where the FX1000 will just add noise or grain.

Tim, on the XA10 I found 18db be to be acceptable. I imagine XA20 is similar.

Maybe one of you guys can tell me what setting I have wrong.

History ... I came from an XH-A1. I often run a Rode shotgun mic on one channel and a Sennheiser wireless mic on the other channel, both XLR inputs. Often have recorded audio on both mics and in post the (Premiere Pro) I have audio from one on the R channel and audio from the other on the L channel. Then I remove the audio channel that I don't want and "fill" that channel with the audio that I do want. Hope that makes sense.

So the other day I shot a quick down and dirty internet spot for a client of mine. First real thing that I shot on the XA20 other than playing around stuff. I had both mics in and each mic showed levels on their respective input channels on screen. I was shooting in MP4 35Mbps mode, which should be ACC audio format. No big deal, just camera on the tri-pod, shot gun mic on camera, wireless mic on the subject. Audio sounded fine in camera.

I took it to post in a 1080p60 timeline, dropped it in, and noticed my audio waves looked the same left to right. After playing around with it, it appears that the audio from both mics was mixed between the R/L channels (I assume in camera) so that I could not pull one mic audio out (for example the shot gun) and used the other. It all worked out fine and sounded good enough for this particular down and dirty project, but most of the time I need one mic input vs another, but I want to record both mic inputs and pick and choose during post. If that makes sense.

So I am curious, what setting is wrong? Do I need to record in AVCHD instead using either LPCM or Dolby Digital? Is it a setting in camera under my channel configuration? Any thoughts?

On the "CH2 Input" screen you need to change the input to "INPUT 2". I think that will take care of it.

Bob

I was wondering that Bob. Thank you. I am sitting at my work computer and do not have the camera with me. I was re-reading the manual for the 20th time and I think that setting you mentioned might be the error of my ways. Going to look at it later tonight.

We have had our XA25 now for just over a month and last week the whole camera crashed. In so much as whilst recording the camera functions failed, you couldn't even switch it off. So its gone back to Canon and the dealer here in New Zealand gave us a full refund.

Now before the "crash" there were some issues with the lens. When zoomed in over 70% there were very noticeable chromatic aberrations when the subject was against a high contrast. It is worth pointing out that when shooting under the same conditions with our XA10, ther were no chromatic aberrations, in fact the image was excellent.

So if all you folk out there with either a XA20 or a 25 want to carry out some tests, then I will know it was just our camera that was faulty from the outset. Shame.

I haven't noticed chromatic aberrations but haven't been looking for it either. What I have noticed is vignetting in the top right and left corners when zoomed in.

Here's a frame grab of it.

I've had that to but it is only some of the time. The closest I've come to pinpointing when this occurs (to the extent it is that obvious) is when the power IS is operating (as opposed to the dynamic IS).

I have not noticed any CA, just the vignetting under some conditions.

Yeah, it's weird. In the video clip that the frame grab came from, the vignetting would come and go moving from the corners inward to the point it is in the picture. Not sure if this only shows up in bright situations or not, will have to do some more testing.

You will see lots of purple fringing in high contrast images (such as leaves backlit against an overexposed source). It seems to be present in all images, but very noticeable when zoomed in. It can be minimized by some settings however, such as a small aperture and stuff like that. I'm not sure that this actually chromatic aberration though, it may be sensor blooming or birefringence from the microlenses on the Beyer filter, which kind of makes sense since you usually see it at a green/white boundary.

The reason it is more obvious now than with earlier cameras is probably a combination of the 20X zoom in junction with the new sensor. They have probably tried to get clever boosting sensitivity, and it has had an unintended consequence.

There is some real chromatic aberration at high zoom, where you will see slight ghosting in *some* places, so there are the two effects at play.

The vignetting I have only noticed when zoomed all the way out on a shaky camera. It doesn't seem to do it on a tripod. Since the vignetting "shakes" I suspect it is due to motion in the camera and adjustments by the stabilization system.

I have a very odd question. I am looking to video blog from a studio setting with perfect lighting scenario and then post to a video site in a compressed format. So features and light quality aren't an issue with the camera. I am strictly talking end result video quality in a comparison of two cameras.

A Canon XA10 for about $1200.00 used on Ebay, or a Sony DSR 500ws SD camera for the same money.

I am wondering what an HD camera with a single cmos sensor compares to a (3) 1/2 chip SD camera with a good lens once compressed for online video whether it be Youtube, Vimeo, or the likes.

Some things to consider. The SD camera recordings are limited to 720x480 pixels output resolution- your first significant limitation, it is huge compared to the XA10, and it is a tape-based system. Its analog output claims somewhat higher resolution but then you would need a separate analog capture capability, or IEEE1394 on the computer. The camera came out in 1999 -. is service and support still reasonably available?

With full control over lighting, many of the issues with lower end camcorders are much less of an issues. And you can easily take the XA10 to shot HD video for other purposes when you like.