Canon introduces XF105 and XF100

[Andy Wilkinson]

I agree, and also agree we need to see a lot more of it in action before we'll know.

Certainly his comment towards the end that the XF100/105 will not compete against the JVC in low light (and I assume he means the JVC GY-HM100 they typically use for their videos, mentioned earlier in the film) is pretty worrying. I don't own a JVC GY-HM100 with it's three 1/4 inch chips but from what I've read it's no champion in low light.

We really need more sample footage to know but I'm, personally, getting less and less interested in the XF100 at it's launch price point - seems that just maybe I'd be paying top end price for a feature set that is partly crippled by that single 1/3 inch sensor design choice (but that's my current personal opinion based on very little facts so far - and may change - just so everyone is clear).

Maybe the Canon XA10 hits the sweet spot better where the (same) sensor, AVCHD codec, good image control (but not as customizable), similar feature set, XLR etc. and most importantly PRICE are much "more balanced", more "in tune with each other", performance wise?

All very interesting stuff!

[Federico Perale]

Originally Posted by Andy Wilkinson

I agree, and also agree we need to see a lot more of it in action before we'll know.

Certainly his comment towards the end that the XF100/105 will not compete against the JVC in low light (and I assume he means the JVC GY-HM100 they typically use for their videos, mentioned earlier in the film) is pretty worrying. I don't own a JVC GY-HM100 with it's three 1/4 inch chips but from what I've read it's no champion in low light.

We really need more sample footage to know but I'm, personally, getting less and less interested in the XF100 at it's launch price point - seems that just maybe I'd be paying top end price for a feature set that is partly crippled by that single 1/3 inch sensor design choice (but that's my current personal opinion based on very little facts so far - and may change - just so everyone is clear).

Maybe the Canon XA10 hits the sweet spot better where the (same) sensor, AVCHD codec, good image control (but not as customizable), similar feature set, XLR etc. and most importantly PRICE are much "more balanced", more "in tune with each other", performance wise?

All very interesting stuff!

yes but I wouldn't buy the XA10 even only for AVCHD.....

isn't there ANY compact professional camcorder that fits the bill, I wonder? good sensor, good codec and tapeless for God sake

[Andy Wilkinson]

Well, especially if you're Apple FCP workflow (I don't know if you are, but note there is a MP4 editing route too) the aforementioned JVC GY-HM100 is currently £2,158.80 incl. VAT at Creative Video Products and £2,034.00 incl. VAT at ProAV. It ticks a lot of those boxes, at least partly...Maybe I should look at it again too.

[Flemming Bo Hansen]

Speaking about low light performance, the comparison page on slachcam.com shows the XF100 as better in handling lowlights condition than GY-HM100 and many other camcorders. Wonder if it’s correct.
Camcorder test charts comparison


Maybe this is a stupid question: What does it mean when Canon describes the XF100/105 as having a Horizontal Resolution of 900 TV lines or more (1920x1080)? Thanks
Canon Professional Network - Canon XF105 and XF100

[Andy Wilkinson]

Yes indeed. I think those much studied Slashcam tests were done in interlace mode (I'm only interested in progressive performance, personally). Whilst the low light performance of the XF100 trounces the JVC in the 12 Lux test comparison, if you look at the 1200 Lux image comparison you'll also see a LOT more colour in the JVC GY-HM100 image. I guess that's 3 chips for you but I'm wary of making too many comparisons as it depends so much on how the cameras were set up.

900 lines of resolution is pretty good. My EX3 manages about 1000, from memory. I'm sure someone will give you a technical definition (as I never use charts). My first Digital 8 Sony managed about 450-500 so things have come a long way!

[Mike Beckett]

Andy, the HM100 doesn't have much of a wide angle, you will need a converter for it. My Panny HMC41 is virtually the same, at around 40mm wide angle or so.

The JVC has no facility for a Lanc either, if that is a requirement - but is a very nice, affordable camera if none of that is a problem. Lack of Lanc remote combined with a higher price last year led to me choosing the Panasonic instead; if I was to do the same now, with reduced prices, it would be a tough call.

(At least the JVC doesn't look like it was designed in 1978!)

[Andy Wilkinson]

Here is some XF305 and XF105 comparative sample footage on YouTube. Starts off with static type shots, some movement in shots then some pans at the end. I don't read Japanese (I assume that's what it is) so know little more than the obvious from the English on screen captions!

YouTube - Canon XF305&105

PS Mike, Yep, know what you mean about that HMC41 1970's design look!

[Kyle Root]

Wow those are some interesting videos of the 105 and 305.

As I expected, the 3-chip 305 has richer colors... and some nice bokeh too.

All things considered, about 1/3 the cost, the XF105 does a great job though.

[Tim Bakland]

Fantastic video comparison. Thank you for posting. Confirms the richness of the 300/5 but also confirms that the 100/5 is a worthy companion.

[Dom Stevenson]

Great test. The bigger camera wins out in the early stages, but the 105 looks at least as good later on. Thanks for the link.

[Kyle Root]

I pretty sure I'm gonna get an XF100.

I was looking at B&H and it is still "pre-order".

Has anyone here bought and received one from B&H?

[Dave Haynie]

Originally Posted by Ken Hull

Blake,
According to Canon, the 4:2:2 color encoding makes these camcorders good for green screen work. However, some cameramen have speculated that the single sensor of only 1/3" size might make it difficult for the camcorder to differentiate colors well enough to take advantage of the 4:2:2 color encoding. We won't know for sure until some green screen tests are done and published. The product is expected to arrive on store shelves sometime in January. So maybe by the end of January we will have our answer!
Ken

I do lots of green screen work. It's the color errors you have to worry about. You get plenty of color on a modern single chipper.. high resolutions, too, given most CMOS sensors deliver 14-bits/sensor of resolution.
What screws with green screen are color errors. Here's a Bayer patten example;

R G R G R G
G B G B G B
R G R G R G
G B G B G B

So take any blue pixel... you can estimate the green value via a linear interpolation horizontally and vertically, and the red along the two diagonals. In a continuous tone image, the interpolated value will be almost exactly what you would have seen with a 3-chipper. But if there's a discontinuity in the color, you have no good idea what the color ought to be for that pixel. A simple linear interpolation won't just guess wrong, it can make up new colors not even seen in the image.

Now, sure, Canon's had a ton of experience with DSLRs doing single chip video, since the last full raster single chip camera went out the door (most of Canon's, Sony's, and JVC's high end consumer cameras do like the DSLR and use higher pixel counts, to avoid interpolation). Could be they have a higher level of image processing that can follow lines and avoid such errors. I guess we'll see.

[Jim Martin]

Originally Posted by Kyle Root

I pretty sure I'm gonna get an XF100.

I was looking at B&H and it is still "pre-order".

Has anyone here bought and received one from B&H?

As of my last update from Canon earlier in the week, around Feb 15th is when they should hit...both here and Europe.


Jim Martin
FilmTools.com

[Brett Munoz]

I ordered my via the presale on BH. I am really looking forward to using this as a B cameras (sometimes A). Will be a great fit with the Merlin. I saw some comparisons of this camera vs the EX3 and 1 and it appears that is has more detail. We will see.

[Alister Chapman]

Originally Posted by Brett Munoz

I saw some comparisons of this camera vs the EX3 and 1 and it appears that is has more detail.

Not unless it aliases like crazy. There's no way a single 1920 x1080 bayer sensor will have more resolution than 3x 1920x1080 sensors. With any camcorder you have to have the optical low pass filter below the G pixel count to prevent moire and aliasing. A 3 chip camera has 1920x1080 green while 1920 x 1080 bayer has only has half that. Not only that if you don't want colour aliases the OLPF should be below the R or B count which is lowers still. Typically manufacturers ignore the R and B aliasing as the resolution hit would be to much to bear, which is why bayer cameras exhibit those read and blue sparkles around coloured edges.

The images I have seen from the 105 have looked very good, but they do have that single chip look with more aliasing than you get from a 3 chip design.