Marketing the XF? at DVinfo.net

Robert Turchick · October 14th, 2010, 12:52 AM

It seems very likely that I will be purchasing an XF300 in the next couple of weeks and found myself trying to explain to a customer how killer the XF is.

The one thing that I haven't found a way to express is the BBC's approval and exactly what that means. I know they hold a pretty high standard for the footage they will accept but here in the USA, nobody (other than us video geeks) cares. Does the Discovery Channel or similar have a set of standards?
I can't seem to find much info on the subject but am I correct in stating that this "approval" under the toughest standards for HD on the planet should give an idea of how great this camera is?
And is it truly "broadcast quality"?

Bottom line is my current clients are very happy with what I have shot using my HMC150...even happier with the 7D, so I'm positive they will be floored by the XF and that will keep them happy for a long time. Just wondering if I can come up with an "elevator speech" to kick open a few more doors.

Thoughts?

Josh Dahlberg · October 14th, 2010, 02:33 AM

Hi Robert,

While Alan Robert's test for the BBC was generally very complimentary towards the XF300 - particularly in terms of resolution and lack of artifacting - it's been surmised that the codec (422 50mb) was the clincher in terms of gaining BBC approval as this is said to be their minimum spec.

The XF is a great camera, you'll love it, but I'm not sure how you'd go about "marketing" the camera to customers. I had a quick look at your website: lots of beautiful shots: surely your skills, portfolio and ideas are much stronger selling points than a new toy? I know my clients' eyes gloss over as soon as I talk shop.

A few selling points that could be digested the moderately tech savvy would be the Lens, Resolution and Codec, ie: the XF300 captures HD video using a Canon L series lens, a full 1920x1080 pixel sensor and a robust professional codec: together these ensure broadcast quality results - "broadcast quality" being a more or less nebulous term :-)

Robert Turchick · October 14th, 2010, 06:41 AM

Yeah...probably geeking out a bit too much but several of my bigger clients are production houses and do know the difference. A few others are looking to create shows to air on HGTV, History Channel, Speed, etc. I think speaking Canon L and robust codec should get the point across though once they see the images that are possible, I think it'll take care of itself.
There wil always be bigger and better toys! I just feel this is an important move up in quality and want to mAke the most of it!
Thanks for the input!

Glen Vandermolen · October 14th, 2010, 07:25 AM

The Discovery Channel has very tough standards, too. I've heard the XF has also been approved for full acquisition by D-HD, but I can't confirm this. I would expect it to be approved for the middle-tier Silver productions, same as the EX cameras, but that's all conjecture.

It wasn't just that the BBC approved the XF, it's that they did it so quickly. They approved it at about the same time it was released, which was unusual. Plus, it was the first 1/3" chip cam to be approved.

Actually, Robert, if your clients have regular dealings with the HD networks, they should have access to each network's camera standards. I'm also curious as to where the XF stands with each network.

Robert Turchick · October 14th, 2010, 08:19 AM

More good info. Only one of the three has had experience placing a show and it was shot on a Red by a whole crew from Hollywood. Luckily the new project he has can be done by me alone!

October 14th, 2010, 12:52 AM	#1
Robert Turchick Trustee Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Mesa, AZ Posts: 1,389	Marketing the XF? It seems very likely that I will be purchasing an XF300 in the next couple of weeks and found myself trying to explain to a customer how killer the XF is. The one thing that I haven't found a way to express is the BBC's approval and exactly what that means. I know they hold a pretty high standard for the footage they will accept but here in the USA, nobody (other than us video geeks) cares. Does the Discovery Channel or similar have a set of standards? I can't seem to find much info on the subject but am I correct in stating that this "approval" under the toughest standards for HD on the planet should give an idea of how great this camera is? And is it truly "broadcast quality"? Bottom line is my current clients are very happy with what I have shot using my HMC150...even happier with the 7D, so I'm positive they will be floored by the XF and that will keep them happy for a long time. Just wondering if I can come up with an "elevator speech" to kick open a few more doors. Thoughts? __________________ The older I get, the better I was!

October 14th, 2010, 06:41 AM	#3
Robert Turchick Trustee Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Mesa, AZ Posts: 1,389	Yeah...probably geeking out a bit too much but several of my bigger clients are production houses and do know the difference. A few others are looking to create shows to air on HGTV, History Channel, Speed, etc. I think speaking Canon L and robust codec should get the point across though once they see the images that are possible, I think it'll take care of itself. There wil always be bigger and better toys! I just feel this is an important move up in quality and want to mAke the most of it! Thanks for the input! __________________ The older I get, the better I was!

October 14th, 2010, 08:19 AM	#5
Robert Turchick Trustee Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: Mesa, AZ Posts: 1,389	More good info. Only one of the three has had experience placing a show and it was shot on a Red by a whole crew from Hollywood. Luckily the new project he has can be done by me alone! __________________ The older I get, the better I was!

October 14th, 2010, 02:33 AM	#2
Josh Dahlberg Major Player Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 513	Hi Robert, While Alan Robert's test for the BBC was generally very complimentary towards the XF300 - particularly in terms of resolution and lack of artifacting - it's been surmised that the codec (422 50mb) was the clincher in terms of gaining BBC approval as this is said to be their minimum spec. The XF is a great camera, you'll love it, but I'm not sure how you'd go about "marketing" the camera to customers. I had a quick look at your website: lots of beautiful shots: surely your skills, portfolio and ideas are much stronger selling points than a new toy? I know my clients' eyes gloss over as soon as I talk shop. A few selling points that could be digested the moderately tech savvy would be the Lens, Resolution and Codec, ie: the XF300 captures HD video using a Canon L series lens, a full 1920x1080 pixel sensor and a robust professional codec: together these ensure broadcast quality results - "broadcast quality" being a more or less nebulous term :-)

October 14th, 2010, 07:25 AM	#4
Glen Vandermolen Space Hipster Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Jacksonville, FL Posts: 1,596	The Discovery Channel has very tough standards, too. I've heard the XF has also been approved for full acquisition by D-HD, but I can't confirm this. I would expect it to be approved for the middle-tier Silver productions, same as the EX cameras, but that's all conjecture. It wasn't just that the BBC approved the XF, it's that they did it so quickly. They approved it at about the same time it was released, which was unusual. Plus, it was the first 1/3" chip cam to be approved. Actually, Robert, if your clients have regular dealings with the HD networks, they should have access to each network's camera standards. I'm also curious as to where the XF stands with each network.