I started video 8 years ago with the Canon GL2 and still use it sometimes, but mostly use my XHA1S. My problem has been for my work the XHA1S is too big many times. I bought an HV40 last year and it works great but does not have the control I like. The new XF100 is the perfect replacement for the GL2 and I am thrilled Canon is coming out with a great HD replacement for the GL2! The GL2 has always been a perfect size camera for street shooting and most of the stuff I video. The question for me is will I still need the XHA1S?

Scott

I have the XH A1, and am considering going tapeless. I am interested in comparisons betwen the XF 100 and the XH A1 (regarding video quality, ability to tweak settings, etc.). As soon as someone has some hands-on experience with both, it would be nice to hear from them! I'm wondering if the XF 100 would be a good replacement for the A1 (I can't afford the XF 300).

Strapless?
 

No way to run a shoulder strap through?

Found this on Youtube. This camera is really compact.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aUbikNXBwaQ

Thanks for that Jason. This camera looks fantastic, and a great option for people like me who used to own cameras like the PDX10 a few years back. It'll be interesting to see how it compares with the competition, but knowing Canon it'll be a winner.

It does look like a great camcorder. I'm still interested in hearings opinions on how it compares with the XH-A1.

Looking at getting 3 XF105's over time to replace some Sony PD170's.. had a quick play with them at IBC and they seem like great value for money..

Just one note of caution - PD170's were excellent performers in low light. Not sure how these Canon's would compare with them on this specific aspect (which may or may not be important for your shooting needs).

Has anyone seen any concrete pricing info yet? If it's priced too low, it will destroy the market for the XH-A1, and if it's the same price as the A1, it will be seen as overpriced despite the better codec.

The XF105 and XF100 aren't shipping until first quarter of 2011, and
firm pricing most likely won't be determined until then. With a few
notable exceptions, the trend with Canon is to overprice by about
25% or so (and this has always been by biggest complaint with
them). In my opinion, you can expect the initial MSRP to be
about $1000 too high. I'll bet you dinner at a fancy restaurant
that the MSRP will be *higher* than that of the XH A1S.

The XF105 / 100 will not "destroy the market" for the XH series.
We're at the point now very far into the XH series lifespan that
the market for the XH A1S will very soon be only with those who
are specifically looking for HDV, a tape-based recording medium.
The A1S and G1S are still current, but I doubt they'll ever be
replaced -- we are just about done with tape altogether.

Yes, there is a LANC jack -- they're calling it a Remote jack these days but it's the exact same thing.

There are some good deals to be had on the XH-A1s at the moment, at least in the UK. A couple of internet retailers have it for about £2200, and even one of the more discount-resistant video specialists has it for below £3k, for the first time since the S model appeared. This may just be a short-term reaction to a general slow-down in sales, or it may be a sign that the announcement of the XF-1xx has knocked a dent in Canon's HDV market.

I'm sure that for the first few months, the new camera will carry a bit of a premium while the initial burst of demand is mopped up. However, once things settle down, then I'd expect the street price of the XF-100 to be about the same as the current street-price of the XH-A1, on the basis that the longer lens and 3 x CCD chips in the XH-A1 would about counter-balance the solid state recording, choice of codec and light weight of the XF-100. The street price of the small JVC and Panansonic camcorders, and whatever Sony come up with in the mean time, will also have an effect.

This raises some interesting questions for me. HDV, and 25 Mbps MPEG2, happens to suit me very well (archiving, work-flow, compatibility with friends, backwards compatibility with miniDV...) and I have a fairly large investment in the format (by hobbyist standards, anyway). I must at least get a spare HDV cam. while they're generally available, so that I can continue to play my archive of tapes (a couple of hundred ATM and still growing), but an HV40, or similar, will do that job. Should I grab an XH-A1s while they're discounted, or hold out in the hope that the XF-100 is a match for quality? At what point do I stop shooting HDV and move to solid state?

Of course, until we see what the XF-100's images look like, this is all rather academic...

I just sold the last of my XH-A1 cameras for about two thirds of what I paid for it. I was very pleased to get that price as I am expecting the prices to plummet in the second hand market soon not particularly because of the introduction of the XF100 but because of the general move away from tape.

Only you can decide the value to you of shooting full raster 1080 and the convenience of shooting to solid state media. I believe the discounts will grow with time and that there is plenty of time to decide after the XF-100/105 come out and we all know what the image quality is like.

...I thought the new XF-100 and XF-105 were pretty interesting until I realized that they are SINGLE CHIP cameras, which makes me question both the color accuracy and low-light sensitivity of these cameras.

Replacing a 3 CHIP camera like the XH-A1s with a 1 CHIP camera does not sound like a good idea to me.

Guy-
I think you need to look at where these cameras are being positioned by Canon. For Police & Military, there is night vision w/ IR illuminator, small size & weight, and high codec for use in blowing up the footage or frame grabs. As a "C" camera for both reality & scripted shows, there again is night vision w/IR and a choice of green or white look, crash cam, dash cam, throw-it-over-a-cliff cam, etc on a high codec that doesn't have to be up/cross converted to match the "A" camera.

As for a stand alone, I don't think anyone is really going to know much until the production models show up and real tests can be made. As I've said before, every year the chips get better in resolution and color seperation so we'll have to wait and see on where the 100/105s "stand".

Jim Martin
FilmTools.com

Single chip RGB pretty much equals the color accuracy of three chip.

Keep in mind that D-SLRs which are all the rage these days are single chip RGB as well.

You really can't pass judgement on the color accuracy XF 105 / 100 without actually seeing it.

Are there any other small sensor single chip prosumer video cameras on the market?

The only single chip cameras that I can think of are:

- Consumer grade video cameras

- Large sensor DSLR still cameras that also shoot video

- The new large sensor AF100 camera from Panasonic

...From what I've read the XF100 / XF105 are going to be priced directly against other 3-chip prosumer cameras like the Panasonic HMC-150 or the Sony NX5U, so these new cameras will have to deliver if Canon wants to be competitive.

Sony A1U?
 

The Sony HVR-A1U comes to mind. Sure, it's getting a bit long in tooth, but it got very good reviews.

Ken

Thats kind of the whole point here in a way. For years we were all conditioned to believe 3 chip was better then 1 chip. Of course that was very true at one point in history. Today that isn't so much true anymore. The best color accurate imagers in the world are currently 1 chip so clearly color is no longer an issue. Basically the only thing a 1 chip design looses is a tiny bit of detail. This is because every other color pixel has to be interpolated. The colors are pretty much exactly what they should be but your details will be a bit softer. This is why I think these cameras may be a tiny bit softer then their 3 chip companions but everything else should be equal.

Well, they still are and always will be for at least one area: low light performance. (They are also better in processing simplicity, but Moore's Law is quickly making that a non-issue.)

I heartily agree. 3-chip color accuracy is very, very poor compared to CFA cameras because you can't build it with sufficiently overlapping spectral response. In our eyes, green and red overlap in certain ways, and you can easily emulate that with CFA (1-chip) cameras. In 3-chip it's impossible, so colors that look the same to the eye will look different to the 3-chip (metamerism failure).

I agree that most 1-chip designs tend to have slightly less detail than 3-chip, but I disagree about the reason. The anti-alias filter reduces aliasing artifacts and contast. On a 1-chip camera, using a weak AA filter is disastrous: it causes the dreaded chroma aliasing artifacts. So most 1-chip cameras use a really good AA filter as they should. But on 3-chip cameras, you only get luma aliasing artifacts, no chroma. To some people, luma is no big deal, so they live with the artifacts rather than sacrifice the contrast.

However, if both cameras are filtered the same amount, then they will have the same luminance contrast and detail. This despite the Bayer interpolation that 1-chip cameras use. 3-chip definitely has far more color resolution, though. If you are shooting something with fine color contrast (a very rare subject -- only test patterns tend to have this kind of detail), then 3-chip would have more resolution. But that would only benefit you if you recorded 4:4:4. Most compression systems immediately throw out the color resolution with 4:2:2 (or worse) precisely because there is so little that ever benefits from full color resolution. 1-chip cameras just take advantage of this fact on the sensor itself instead of at the time of compression.

Finally got to have a play with this camcorder today at the Canon Expo in Islington, London.

Superb build quality. The last time i had something like this in my hands was the PDX10, but this thing feels a lot more solid, with most of the pro features from its big brothers in the XF range. The LCD is amazing for a camera of this price point, and given its size, the manual controls are excellent. And then of course there's the BBC approved codec.

Ideally I'd like to hang on to my 5D mkii, but should we have to part company later this year to facilitate buying this camera in January i'll be a happy man. It's been a while since a camera leapt out at me as such an obvious choice for my next purchase, but short of a surprise announcement by the competition, the XF100 will be my next camera.

Did I miss a recent press release, or did they mention at the Canon Expo what the suggested retail will be? I've not seen a suggested retail on these cameras yet; only speculation so far.

Any idea on pricing yet?

No firm pricing info yet, because these cameras are not
due to appear until Q1 of next year, and there's no way
to know right now what the yen will be doing at that time.

I handled these at the Canon Pro Photo event in Islington, London today. Jan/Feb availability was mentioned. Superb build quality and design. Canon are onto a winner with this small form factor.... and I'm sure they know it.... so I'd expect the pricing to start a little higher than we might otherwise like it to be and then gradually fall over a few months (as is typical). These little cams were not on my agenda until today but now I'm going to be studying all the online reviews and clips as these come in!

Is it possible to use XF100 as a B cam for EX1R 'am just thinking. looking at the form factor it will be perfect for wedding and the likes .

Jealous . . . . paint me green . .

OK, but I'd sworn that the upgrade from my XM2 would be one with 3-rings. How did you get on with the "single" ring?

Oh yes, oh yes . . .

I notice that one of the accessories would be a tele adaptor. That may just calm me down.

Real World testing is defo for this chappie.

Grazie

Sure, adapting to the single ring and it's controls is something that will take some getting used to as indeed are some of the other compromises/some of the omissions that are inevitable to get it into such a small, highly portable (and hopefully reasonable cost) package.

It's really down to how good the "non L" lens is, or is not (we already know the codec is stella from XF300/305 reviews), and exactly what price it's going to go for. As we here in the UK all know, the mooted $2999 US price is unlikely to just translate into a straight currency conversion to Sterling. I think they just charge what they think the market will stand (bit like our real ale pricing up and down the UK!).

I'm fully expecting low light performance and true resolving power of the sensor to be a little south of the XF300s for technical reasons already well covered on here - but that could still end up being superb for such a small cam/price point. I stress could, we don't know yet.

It's just as well it's not available right now as I'd have been so tempted to have got my business debit card out there and then! I really was all set on just buying a little Canon HF S21 or Panny TM700 for extra coverage early in the new year (and may well still do this if Canon go silly on the UK pricing). However, I've never been a fan of AVCHD.

Once you've seen this XF100, got it in your hands and see/feel just how well it appears to have been designed/put together/fits in the hand (really great LCD too!) then you too could easily "weaken" into dolling out the extra dosh in a heartbeat!

Stop it Andy, stop it! I can only take so much of this temptation before I whip out my own credit card, and goodness knows that's a dangerous path to tread. Please, please could everyone say this camera is rubbish and should never be bought, and my bank balance can sleep tight at night... :-)

So Andy, to what extent was it a working model? Was it taking pictures? Was it hooked up to a monitor, and if so, what did the images look like? Were you able to try the zoom or the auto-focus, or look into the menus?

Not hooked up to big a monitor (but the XF305 was - that looked great!). Lovely LCD - Peaking looked very good (I find this feature totally essential with my EX3). Regarding the single lens ring, the well placed switch just behind it on the left (controls) side allows choice in what it's doing. Don't forget you've also got the small little wheel thing further back that can be assigned to some functions - this is also well placed, as indeed were all the controls really.

I could n't properly hold it in the palm as they had a cable coming out of the middle of the grip side (which prevented you putting you hand fully in the grip).

We tried the zoom and it was actually really good, slow creep zoom seemed perfectly possible. Auto focus worked but that's about as far as I took that inspection as I shoot full manual 99.9% of the time anyway. Viewfinder was adequate rather than stunning from a quick peek into it. The EX3 spoils me in that area...

I think someone wrote it earlier in this thread, sometimes you just pick up a camera and everything just seems "right" - and that's the feeling I got with this even though I'd essentially previously dismissed it as a possible addition to my current Sony EX3/Canon 7D/Sony HC1 arsenal (the latter ageing, but still going...but rarely comes out now!). This cam would be a replacement for the HC1 so I was originally looking for something of that equivalent size/price area but if this cams pictures are as good as we all hope they might be I'll take a stretch and go for it - but only if the price is sensible!...are you listening Canon?

Tele Adaptor for XF-100?
 

I was able to locate the Wide-Angle adaptor on the Canon site, but not a Telephoto adaptor. Can you point us to that information?
The only potential deal-killer on this cam for us might be it's 10x lens, as we are used to the great 20x lens on all our other Canon cams. I already contacted a third party outfit regarding a potential tele adaptor lens, and they had no plans on producing one for this model.
-Thanks!

I'm not sure your experience would be the same for everybody - your "us", as this info is readily available from within the Official Canon PDF for both XF1xxs and I'm betting that "others" would have read it prior to my posting?

As I said, I read the official Canon PDF on these matters. I didn't/wouldn't glean such crucial information as this from making enquiries from a "third party". Added to which, and in regard to such important information, as the option for more reach, I prefer to go to the designers of the machine itself, which is exactly what I did. As a staunch Canon XM2 user, wishing to up my "game", I can't afford to take these matters lightly. Presently I have 20x and with a 2x adaptor it is mighty powerful reach. Not to have this again, would truly be painful for me.

Canon have met me halfway with the 58mm - I can still use my WA58mm (maybe?) - so why then ditch/divert the part of the market-share by then hobbling me with a mean ole 10x? The single chip Bayer Filter system I'd need to see in action to make any "hard-done-by" comments. The single Ring design, again, I'd have to experience too.

Canon will be ready for teeth suckers like myself. They've seen and heard it all before. Maybe it's time to recognise that deaf ears is all I can expect? (But I would be able to buy 2 of these machines and do 3-D!)

Even at this earliest of announcements, I see that this camera has many "market-share" fits, least of which is surveillance; the XF3xxs as a cammie for broadcasters then these offerings are nice lil brothers to those plus that all important "must've" 3-D bleedin' edge yahooo.

Am I a wee bit soured? I sure am.

Regarding the TeleConv, go back to the official Canon site. Try and read it without weeping.

And again, I really need to get my hands on this palm offering to be fair on Canon and myself.

Grazie

If it is possible to use the WD-H58 0.7x wide angle adapter lens, then it becomes probable that you can use the TL-H58 1.5x tele adapter lens. We can only hope that this possibility pans out. My biggest concern for the wide angle is given the XF-100/105 has a natively wider field of view than the HF-S series cameras the WD-H58 was designed for, does the WD-H58 remain a fully zoom through lens at the wide end? 40mm FOV x 0.7 = 28mm FOV (HF-S series) vs. 30mm FOV x 0.7 = 21mm FOV (XF-10x series), truly very wide. At this point I am in a holding pattern of wait and see. So many cameras, so little time...and money.

Andy Wilkinson

I couldn't get conformation on the price for the reasons Chris mentioned no doubt, but the lady i spoke to seemed to think it would come in at around 2 and a half grand in the UK. Not cheap when you consider you can pick up an XHA1 for that, but of course this is the next generation, and i suspect they know they're on to a winner.

BTW, I thought the single lens ring was pretty easy to get used to. In fact after 15 mins playing around i was comfortable with jumping between focus, iris and zoom.

Very excited about this camera.

Thanks for the pricing ball park.

At current exchange rates, that's almost exactly $4,000 U.S. which agrees with the price a guy at the New York Canon Expo gave for the XF100 (the XF105 being $5,000.)

I'm still hoping it'll be closer to $3,000!

[Edited to correct the model numbers!]

Excellent info. Thanks for the input. We'll see if the TL-H58 is a viable solution soon.

I'm curious about the variable frame rate "In 1080 mode, fast motion is supported up to 2.5x the normal rate and as slow as 1/2.5x"
So does this mean that if I record in 1080p30 in half speed slow motion mode, that it will actually capture 60 progressive frames per second but play back at half the frame rate? It seems to me that you would be able to drop the file into a 1080p60 timeline, adjust the playback rate if needed, and have yourself 1080p60 footage. I'm sure there must be something I'm missing here, because otherwise they would just spec it as able to shoot 1080p60. How would the audio be handled during fast/slow motion recording? You could always use a separate field recorder for the audio if necessary. Any thoughts or input is welcome!

Hey everyone....I'm excited because later today I'll have my hands on a 105....I'm anxious to see the size, picture, and how the functions work (lens ring). We are going to try and get a video up on you tube if we have it long enough. As Dr. Watson said..."I'll report later with my findings".....

Jim Martin
FilmTools.com