Xf100 eta
 

XF100 will arrive at retailers in Denmark 10/02/2011
Price in Danish currency DKK 20.995 ex. VAT (moms)

so do you guys think that the XF100 and 105 will set the new standard for compact HD professional camcorders?

will it be the JVC HM 100 killer?

what's the difference between the 100 and the 105?

Based upon my never even seeing either of these cameras but relying on the published specs, IMHO, yes, the XF100/105 will set the standard for compact camcorders - for now. You gotta love the broadcast codec, the full raster chip (even if it is only one), the cool IR mode. Comparisons already done between the XF100 and its competition has the XF clearly the winner.

The 105 has HD/SDI, time code and genlock ports, the 100 doesn't.

if that's the case I would surely go for the 100 as I don't need any of these : )

let's see how the single chip performs in low light.... the only video I've seen wasn't really enough to judge

".....Not shipping until early Feb 2011 due to Production delay...."

I'm very keen on this camera, but having had a word with a pal in the BBC's DV Solutions department this morrning, he seemed to think that in spite of the broadcast-quality codec, the single 1/3 chip will fail the BBC's compliance guidelines. I'm still waiting to see some footage shot with this camera (apart from the French shots from Lyon) before I make up my mind. My pal might be proved wrong - I certainly hope so anyway...

This would not surprise me at all. The XF305 was fine with the BBC, but a single 1/3" chip? Hmmm...

BTW, could you ask your friend how they're liking the 305s? I'm curious about them, and there are none nearby.

Glen,
I'll certainly ask tomorrow.

I don't think he will be proved wrong..... the BBC is basing it's guidelines on ones accepted by a lot of other people, including the EBU, and the codec is only one aspect. Front end performance is just as important, if not more so. Even the XF305 only just scrapes in because of the 1/3" chips, and I believe Canon have had to pull off some clever tricks with their lens to compensate for that. But quite a lot more is specified for compliance apart from chip physical size, most obviously 1920x1080 pixels per chip in a 3 chip camera.

The XF100s only have a single 1920x1080 sensor in a Bayer pattern, hence the end result will be well down on what you'd expect from 3 such sensors in a 3 chip camera, and hence it's unlikely to get the same level of full approval.

It's going to be more complicated as time goes on to specify guidelines simply. At the moment " 1/2" or bigger " is quite simple. With DSLRs, the AF101, and the F3, they are all obviously far bigger sensors than even 1/2" - but certainly DSLRs don't meet the guidelines by a big way. We'll have to wait and see what's made of the other cameras.

Here's a XF105 Video - a rare thing at the moment! Disappointing in that there is not much actual footage, mainly just a feature run down - but I'll post it anyway as parts are worth viewing.

YouTube - Canon XF100 & XF105 Hands-On With Sample Footage

what I don't understand, but let's first see it in action, is why Canon decided to launch a camcorder packed with such a nice back-end and functions, and then go for a one 2M pixel 1/3 inch sensor??

it seems like a weird decision anyway...

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

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.

XF100/105 lowlight and TV resolution
 

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

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!

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!)

XF305 & XF105 Footage
 

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!

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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

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.

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.

Folowing on from what Alistair said, it's just not possible for the XF100 to have more real detail than an EX or an XF300.

Beware of artificial detail enhancement giving a false impression. One of the best thing about the 3 chip1920x1080 cameras is that they are so naturally sharp that the detail enhancement can be turned right down to give a fine "natural" look whilst remaining sharp. If that was the case, and it was compared to an XF100 with detail turned up, the XF100 might superficially look "sharper", but it would be a false "video look" sharpness, not real detail.

david-

under proper lighting would a single chip camera like the xf105/xf100 have "enough" real detail?

i know we all spend soooo much time discussing cameras under low light situation.

but for what i do, the difference between low light and enough light is adding one instrument.

i wonder how the image quality of xf105/xf100 cameras will be with "enough" light.

ymmv

be well

rob

Following on from what Alister and David have written, my GUESS is that that comparison mentioned by Brett may have been from, e.g. the 1200 Lux comparitive pictures on sites such as Slashcam. If you set up their comparison page with say EX1 or EX1r from the drop down list on one side and the XF100 on the other drop down list then, to my eyes, the XF100 looks to have more resolution (you can compare the pictures from both cams side by side on the same screen). There are also chart comparison shots, lens distortion shots etc. Comparison of the ISO charts shows the EX1r to be better than the XF100, at least to me, even if the pictures suggest the opposite.

Heck, if you compare the tiny little 3 chip, high-end consumer Panasonic TM700 against the XDCAM EXs on the Slashcam site then you might be also surprised!

I guess it really depends on how much you trust camcorder review sites like Slashcam are able to set up the cameras correctly. Certainly, in theory (as has been pointed out by those far more knowlegeable on sensor design than I) the XF100/105 with it's single 1920x1080 sensor should come in under the 3 chipped full raster XDCAM EXs with respect to REAL resolution. The Slashcam site also has data for the XF300.

Slashcam site is in the link below so you can draw your own conclusions.

Camcorder test charts comparison

Well, it's interesting to compare the EX1, the EX3 and the EX1R amongst themseles on that site. You'd think you were looking at three totally different cameras, not three which substantially share the same front end!

Compare the EX1 with the EX3 on the res chart wedge, and they don't seem noticeably different for real sharpness, (not surprisingly!) but the EX3 has vastly more detail enhancement than the EX1.

The trouble is that there is no "correct" and "incorrect" in terms of the setups in some ways - it becomes a matter of preference. But you do need to have some sort of yardstick if you going to attempt to make such comparisons, and the level of detail enhancement is a good example of this.

The EX1R also seems to have been set to a very strange colour balance.......

There is an A/B side-by-side test between the XF100 and XF300 on YouTube. It's a very good test with colorimetry looking almost identical between the two cameras but the resolution difference is noticeable. The poster didn't post the detail on the settings, though. I guess there's no surprise why one camera can both weigh as well as cost only half that of the other while still claiming the same paper output specs of 1920x1080 frame size and 4:2:2 color sampling at 50 Mbps.

You worry too much All.. I have seen the side by side comparison with the XF300, slightly less detail and the bokeh doesn't appear as smooth. I got it mainly as a B, sometimes A cam. Will work great as a compact on the Merlin. The detail still looks great and awesome low light. That little 50Mbps CMOS chip is going to rock! Sure, not true 4:2:2 due to the single chip design but who cares, its looks the squat and no one will ever be able to tell except us video dorks.

haha great comment Brett : )

XF105 - Défilé Jolidon Video
 

Well, if you wanted to know how well the XF105 renders skin tones in artificial light with it's single chip I guess this is a very good example to view.... as it's a catwalk parade of ladies in underwear as the thumbnail will no doubt show ;-) He has posted another video with the XF105 on Vimeo too (pretty similar subject matter). Sadly, no info on camera settings on the Vimeo pages. Well you can't have everything! Wonder why France seems to be getting the baby XFs a bit early?

Whoa!
Who knew a single chip cam could have such..er..dynamic range and...umm...great gamma curves?

The big mystery is why there's a guy sitting at a table - with his back to the show the entire time? Isn't he interested in the camera???

Best camera demo video ever!

I don't think he loves cams like we do. I can't figure out what could be so distracting when you could be checking out a real canon xf cam in action. I agree the gamma curves look pretty amazing.
Cheers
Ratu

I'd like to know how it compares to the Panasonic HMC40, especially in terms of low light performance.

so has anyone received it? some websites in the UK now mention a 1st of March availability

Feb 23 here in Toronto, I'm in line already :)

Hey Buba;
Did you get it. Post your impressions. I like to know. I thinking about getting one too.

Hi all,

I had a 105 on order until today to be used as a B cam on a trip on Feb. 17th, but my dealer (Proav in the UK has just changed the delivery schedule till "Delivery early March", so I had to cancel the order.

Seems like there\'s a delay from Canon\'s side.

/peter