XL1S discontinued?! Guess why... ;)

[Luis Caffesse]

"I could imagine adding a "new" Canon XL if (an important if) the video shot with one complimented and could be edited with the other without any glaring differences..."

I don't think we will see a "new" Canon XL.
I think this camera will be a whole new camera.
Think of it as a replacement, not an upgrade.

Canon has a history of upgrading once, and then replacing.
They did it with the L1, L2, XL1, XL1s.

I'm not saying you wouldn't be able to cut them together.
I mean, I guess you could intercut XL1 footage with L2 footage.
But, I woudln't count on it.

-Luis

[Nick Hiltgen]

I would bet that if it's SD you'd be able to cut the camera's together if only because I've seen XL-1 and DVX-100 footage cut together and it really looked pretty good, of course the eidtor is a wiz with FCP which probably helped. I think provided it's a SD camera you can cut together and fix in post. However for live events you might not be so lucky. That being said a lot of live events that are on the national networks use a mix of HD and SD so maybe it's ok to cut that together as well.

[Michael Struthers]

The panny sdx900 is 16x9 native with 2/3 chips and 24p and sells for 25k without lenses. And the footage is very equivalent to super16mm film. >>>

When viewed on an NTSC monitor, or projected (digitally? or after a film-out?)
-----------------------

I only viewed it on a large NTSC monitor. And it was indoor footage by a darn good DP. And it looked smashing. I was kind of floored, actually.

I've never seen footage from the sdx900 projected to a big screen or film out...

--------------------------------

All canon has to do to "beat" the dvx100a is
SD 24 and 30p
good xlr
16x9
interchangeable lenses

This canon could pull off with a 3.5 k cam, no problem.

But, there are the "extras" that could push the Canon into another category -

1/2 chips
HDV1080I
Some other form of HD

Unfortunately, I don't believe Canon is willing to bypass the mpeg2 HDV standard...


And hey, how about a dvx100"c" with 16x9 native and a lens mount...

[Dylan Couper]

<<<-- Originally posted by Michael Struthers :

But, there are the "extras" that could push the Canon into another category -

1/2 chips
HDV1080I
Some other form of HD

-->>>

That, with the 16:9 chips you mentioned, would push the base street price up into the $6000+ range, well out of the DVX100 class and into the Sony DSR-350 range. Plus, the cost of the lenses (bigger for 1/2" chips) would double. I think the cheapest Canon 1/2" lens, an 18x, is something like $3500 on it's own. Thats the same price as a DVX100 for just a lens.

What I'm saying is, the 1/2" chips ain't happening. It's a completely new field of camera. A camera that, as Jeff and Ken explained above, isn't going to happen.

Although I really wish it was because it would kick ass. What we might see is Sony, JVC, or Panny releasing a 24p/HDV version of their 1/2" chip cameras... Still closer to $10,000 but man oh man...

[Robert Mann Z.]

i noticed interchangable lenses are on everyones list...lets just hope that the xl mount is much improved, or at least new lenses come about....

really i can live with the xl1 as it stands now for the most part, litttle changes here and there like changing the green 'rec' to red, uv meters on screen...n so forth... but the real issue is glass

unless you want to spend for a mini35 your choice of glass is really limited, i don't see why they can't make better glass for the xl mount

if there is no new glass out with the new xl is see no reason of adding interchangable lenses as a benifit...

[Rob Lohman]

Ehm, why are you looking for better glass? Canon is one of the
best manufacturers of glass out there. The 16x manual lens
is extremely sharp.

It sounds like you are looking for different mounts so you can
mount other types of lenses. Not "better" glass. Keep in mind
that is SD resolution (the XL1S), not HD or film!

[Robert Mann Z.]

<-- The 16x manual lens is extremely sharp. -->

i disagree, canon's auto lens is one of the worst detachable video lenses i have ever used, based on contrast, sharpness and speed...and the manual lens is not wide enough...

i'm looking for options to get to use a 1/3 sized version of canon's sharp J22ex7, i'm fine with lack of ois...just give me a fast sharp lens...

[Ed Baatz]

<<<-- Originally posted by Robert Mann Z. :

"lets just hope that the xl mount is much improved"

"your choice of glass is really limited"

-->>>

Robert,

Do you mean that you would like to see a totally different lens mount for the XL or instead, a wider (better) choice of XL lenses?

You don't like the lens quality? I must not be as discerning as you, because I think the current lens quality is great. Yes, the lenses are not million dollar optics but for the price I think they are exceptional. Could they be better? Sure, but at what price? For Canon to provide the highest quality lens possible would price me out of the camcorder. I try to avoid unrealistic expectations...

I'll agree that without using the EF lens adapter on the XL1S the selection of lenses for the XL is basically either the 3X wide angle or the 16X telephoto... Not really a large selection? I find them both highly satisfactory... You don't? Not wide enough? Not sharp enough? Hmmmmm.

If Canon would change the existing XL mount (very doubtful I hope) so that "old" lenses couldn't be used on future camcorders it would seriously impact my future purchases of "new" Canon equipment...

Personally, the way Canon has it now seems fine to me. If I want an exotic lens I can use the EF adapter and choose from a LARGE selection of different lenses.

Just having the choice between the 3X, 16X and 1.6X extender satisfies my needs though. Your needs must be far different than mine.

== Ed ==

[Luis Caffesse]

"i noticed interchangable lenses are on everyones list..."

I think most of us have listed interchangable lenses simply because that has always been something that set the XL line apart in its price range. I seriously doubt that Canon would take away the one unique feature they have, and whether or not it is a 'real' benefit, the fact remains that it is a 'perceived' benefit to the majority of consumers (much like 24p when it comes to the DVX).

"really i can live with the xl1 as it stands now for the most part, litttle changes here and there'

Again, maybe I'm expecting too much, but I believe we are going to see something much more drastic than 'little changes.'
Given Canon's history, this new camera should replace the XL1s, not simply upgrade it.

"unless you want to spend for a mini35 your choice of glass is really limited"

There may be some truth in what you say, your choice of glass is limited to a handful of lenses. But, compare that to any other camera in the XL1s pricerange. How much more limited are you with a DVX or a PD170?

"if there is no new glass out with the new xl is see no reason of adding interchangable lenses as a benifit..."

I would still say that it is a benefit to have ANY choice over your lenses, as opposed to being stuck with a fixed lens.

Let's not forget the price range and competition for this camera.
The XL1s doesn't go head to head with the SDX900, or even the DSR500 or 300. We are talking about a sub $5000 camera.

Regardless, if they do make major changes to the design, as I suspect they will, I think it is safe to assume that new lenses will folllow.

-Luis

[Mike Doyle]

I was so frustrated with the poor quality and handling of the 16X "white lens" that came with my original XL-1 I nearly trashed the camera. Finally the 16X manual became available and I found myself thinking rationally again. Now if Canon would only offer a manual 3X I'd be ecstatic. Having switched to the XL-1/XL-1S from shooting Sony Beta SP cameras with Canon lenses, I know that they can produce terrific lenses.

Come on Canon! Gimme a 3X manual!

[Rob Lohman]

Maybe I'm going to get everyone angry here, but perhaps a
wide angle adapter for the 16x manual would be a way to go?
(I'm just WONDERING here...)

[Robert Mann Z.]

interesting reaction, i had no idea...

but the lens choices are limited, the 16x auto is an bad lens at any price, the manual is good, but not great, could be better

i had no idea my needs are so special or exotic, i don't shoot movies, i don't shoot 24p, just plain old video for watching on the tele, i like it as sharp as possible, i also need a wide lens as i do a lot of interviews, and like the look that a wide lens gives me...

if you offer a $10,000 option for $3,000 camera in the mini35, why not offer a good $5,000 wide 12x lens for those who shoot video for tv playback...

if $5,000 is too rich or exotic for some folks fine don't buy it, use the standard lens, i'm only estimating on the price, i have no idea how much a lens would cost

if you have ever used ef option you would know it's as good as useless for anyone wanting to shoot wide, or inside a room for that matter...it also lacks a rocker

i really don't care if they change the mount or add more lenses, i really don't see canon doing either in the near future, it's just my gripe with the xl1 series

[Ed Baatz]

<<<-- Originally posted by Robert Mann Z. : i really don't care if they change the mount or add more lenses, i really don't see canon doing either in the near future, it's just my gripe with the xl1 series -->>>

I'd think that your "gripe" is just as valid as ANYONE elses?

Your wish list is equally worthwhile for you...

If you object to the sharpness (or lack of) of the XL's lenses that's fine too? Me, I am happy with the lenses and think they are perfectly acceptable --- all things (like price) considered. Like I said, they could obviously be much better, but it doesn't seem very realistic to expect a $3k camcorder to have big dollar optics.

I've shot with Sony BetaSP equipment and the XL doesn't compare. Nor does the price...

If you ARE more discerning than me, which seems to be the case --- I don't think it means either of us is "wrong". Maybe I'm just easier to please? [g]

== Ed ==

[Luis Caffesse]

"i really don't care if they change the mount or add more lenses, i really don't see canon doing either in the near future"

I completely agree that the XL line could use more lenses too choose from.

And although I'm not sure about changing the mount, I would not be surprised to see Canon add new lenses to the XL line if they are in fact coming out with a new camera.

Regardless of whether or not the old XL lenses will be compatible with the new camera, it just seems to make sense to release a new line of lenses with a new camera. I can't see people getting too excited about a new interchangable lens camera if there are no new lenses to be used.

So, you may just get your wish Robert.
Just my opinion of course.

-Luis

[Charles Papert]

<<I can't see people getting too excited about a new interchangable lens camera if there are no new lenses to be used.
>>

I think that if the XL2 has the feature set we hope it will, there will be a LOT to get people excited about.

I agree about the 16x standard (white) lens, I sold mine last year and have never missed. Baffling piece of gear. Love my 14x manual though.

I was disappointed that the 16x manual didn't zoom any wider than the 14x. My sense was that it was all about protecting the existing 3x wide angle lens.

I do hope that in the next year or two they will introduce a "pro" version of the manual lenses that covers a greater zoom range at the wide end and retains a manual iris ring. I would be happy to pay extra for that (well, not happy but content).