Owning an XF100, I have been holding off buying a second camera, thinking that with the new Panny PX270 and the upcoming Sony PXW 180 both offering the same (or better) feature list at $1000 less, Canon would be almost giving the XF300 series cameras away. Yet here we are three months past the release of said Panny, and the price hasn't dropped a cent. Is this camera (or the canon codec) so good that it can maintain this $1000 premium?

With the XF200/205 is the XF 400/405 far behind? (I have no idea).

A major price drop usually means sales are lagging, or they want to clear out inventory before a new model kills sales of the oold..

Demand from the broadcast industry? BBC seal of approval? Don't know.
I have noticed that all XF models seem to have high re-sale value used, based on B&H Photo Video. Check out their used prices versus new prices. I just checked. A new XF100 is $2,500 (rounded) and used ones are $2,000 to $2,080 (rounded).

The XF300/305 are still very relevant, very good cameras. Canon has a history of moving slowly with new versions but when they do, I've noticed they are ahead of everyone else which keeps the resale up. The XF300/305 is their flagship camcorder. Can't really consider the Cinema cams in the same category. Almost regret selling my 300 but I'm in love with my C100/Ninja!

Hey Guys,

I'm not that experienced with camcorders and I'm getting ready to shoot a sales/marketing presentation, in a Sheraton hotel event room, about 150 people will attend. I think the XF300 would be a decent camera, maybe even overkill, as the final delivery is for the internet, laptops, tablets, and smartphones. The event will be 2-days of 4 hour mornings, with a break after about 2 hours.Audio is critical.

My experience is with shooting DSLR's. Lots of B roll stuff, and some interviews.

I have a small budget, and the equipment I will be using will be rented, so I have some choice, not a lot but some. The XF300 is not real expensive to rent so,my thinking is, it has a good zoom length, it can record to CF cards, I think 64 gig cards will be great for the length of record times, and it records good audio, right?

However, I'm concerned that the XF300's reputation for low-light performance is lacking. I don't want grainy video. I guess the question is what is the beginning level of low-light on a XF300?

Will be shooting wide mostly with depth of focus needed. Some rooms can have good lighting and some not, I can't get there to evaluate it before the shoot. I feel that the XF300 is up to the task, based on what I have researched on, I'm just really concerned about the low light performance.

Any and all help will be greatly appreciated, Chime in Please!