xf100 replacement anytime soon? at DVinfo.net

Abhay Delgado · January 14th, 2014, 02:07 AM

I do web design work for clients and they have been asking me to film commercials for them as well as wedding events and sporting events.

I have been looking at the xf100. i read that the xf100 was released in 2011. I am not very familiar with camcorder technology and the lifespan before it gets replaced. is the xf100 considered an old camera? is going to be replaced soon?

my concern is i don't want to buy a camcorder that is on the cusp of being replaced by a new model is this the case here?

Also i am assuming since the xf100 records in 4:2:2 color and 50 mbps it is the correct choice for what I'm trying to do or does that not matter too much.

If am incorrect or if there is another camcorder that is better i am open to suggestions. I have found the xf100 for $2000 price. If there is a better choice for around that price that can do the same let me know.

if the xf100 is a good camcorder what are some of the pros and cons so i know my limits of the camcorder

David Dixon · January 14th, 2014, 09:49 AM

I got an XF100 as a retirement present to myself in April 2011 and have loved it. I do semi-pro work for local non-profits now. I don't think it's been as popular as it deserved because it came out just as DSLR video shooting really went more mainstream. I also got a 60D, but use the XF for 95% of my work. You can customize the picture to get it very sharp, as flat or vivid as you want, etc.

I love the 4:2:2 color and many of the other pro features. I also love the small size and light weight, great audio thru the xlrs, etc. It has good stabilization and autofocus.

But for commercials, weddings and sports, I'm not sure it's the best option.
Commercials - they will probably expect the trendy shallow depth of field look - the only way to get that on the XF is to zoom way in, open up the iris, and have the camera close to the subject and the background far away - and even then it's not super blurry and the bokeh is not great
Weddings - I don't do these, but they usually have lots of low light shooting. The XF is pretty decent in low light, but not great. This is also hampered by the fact that the camera cannot use a lot of video gain without getting a bit noisy
Sports - it has only a 10x zoom - for many sports that's not enough, and the merely average low light might be a factor here as well

It's an interesting question. For the things I do, I'm not sure there is even today a camera that I would buy that would be better for me. I wish it had 1080/60p, a cleaner and larger sensor (for better low light and shallower DOF), and built-in ND filters. The only sports I shoot is family stuff and I gladly sacrifice the longer zoom to keep the smaller camera size.

One thing to look at would be the XA series Canons. They are newer sensors, and do 60p I think, but they still don't have the image controls, lens quality, and codec of the XF100. They do have longer zooms. For me, I still think they would be a lateral move, but they might be worth looking at.

The Panasonic AG-AC90 is in your price range but is still not super in low light, only has a 12x zoom, and has 4:2:0 AVCHD. It is a little cheaper than the XF100 and does have 1080/60p. Again, for me it would be a sideways move, but it might be an option.

I can't help with other choices - as I said, I'm not really a DSLR shooter. I'd love to have a C100, but even at $5K it has some omissions that would be tough for me to adapt to. I'd also like an XF300, but again, for $5K I'd rather not invest today in 2010 tech. I'd probably like the 5DMkIII, but it's out of my budget for now.

So, I hope this was of some help in pondering the pros and cons.

David Dixon · January 14th, 2014, 09:56 AM

Sorry, to answer the question - XF100 replacement anytime soon? I doubt it. Canon seems to be improving the XA series in this price range. I really wish they would come out with updated XF series, but expect that Canon (wrongly, IMHO) probably thinks this is not a market niche worth much attention these days.

There is a Sony model PMW-100, I think, that came out after the XF100 and has similar specs. It's a bit costlier, but adds timecode sync like the XF105.

There's always the new $2K Sony camera with 4K imaging, but it's too new to really have been tested out.

January 14th, 2014, 02:07 AM	#1
Abhay Delgado Tourist Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Gulf Coast, MS Posts: 1	xf100 replacement anytime soon? I do web design work for clients and they have been asking me to film commercials for them as well as wedding events and sporting events. I have been looking at the xf100. i read that the xf100 was released in 2011. I am not very familiar with camcorder technology and the lifespan before it gets replaced. is the xf100 considered an old camera? is going to be replaced soon? my concern is i don't want to buy a camcorder that is on the cusp of being replaced by a new model is this the case here? Also i am assuming since the xf100 records in 4:2:2 color and 50 mbps it is the correct choice for what I'm trying to do or does that not matter too much. If am incorrect or if there is another camcorder that is better i am open to suggestions. I have found the xf100 for $2000 price. If there is a better choice for around that price that can do the same let me know. if the xf100 is a good camcorder what are some of the pros and cons so i know my limits of the camcorder

January 14th, 2014, 09:49 AM	#2
David Dixon Major Player Join Date: May 2011 Location: Knoxville, Tennessee Posts: 495	Re: xf100 replacement anytime soon? I got an XF100 as a retirement present to myself in April 2011 and have loved it. I do semi-pro work for local non-profits now. I don't think it's been as popular as it deserved because it came out just as DSLR video shooting really went more mainstream. I also got a 60D, but use the XF for 95% of my work. You can customize the picture to get it very sharp, as flat or vivid as you want, etc. I love the 4:2:2 color and many of the other pro features. I also love the small size and light weight, great audio thru the xlrs, etc. It has good stabilization and autofocus. But for commercials, weddings and sports, I'm not sure it's the best option. Commercials - they will probably expect the trendy shallow depth of field look - the only way to get that on the XF is to zoom way in, open up the iris, and have the camera close to the subject and the background far away - and even then it's not super blurry and the bokeh is not great Weddings - I don't do these, but they usually have lots of low light shooting. The XF is pretty decent in low light, but not great. This is also hampered by the fact that the camera cannot use a lot of video gain without getting a bit noisy Sports - it has only a 10x zoom - for many sports that's not enough, and the merely average low light might be a factor here as well It's an interesting question. For the things I do, I'm not sure there is even today a camera that I would buy that would be better for me. I wish it had 1080/60p, a cleaner and larger sensor (for better low light and shallower DOF), and built-in ND filters. The only sports I shoot is family stuff and I gladly sacrifice the longer zoom to keep the smaller camera size. One thing to look at would be the XA series Canons. They are newer sensors, and do 60p I think, but they still don't have the image controls, lens quality, and codec of the XF100. They do have longer zooms. For me, I still think they would be a lateral move, but they might be worth looking at. The Panasonic AG-AC90 is in your price range but is still not super in low light, only has a 12x zoom, and has 4:2:0 AVCHD. It is a little cheaper than the XF100 and does have 1080/60p. Again, for me it would be a sideways move, but it might be an option. I can't help with other choices - as I said, I'm not really a DSLR shooter. I'd love to have a C100, but even at $5K it has some omissions that would be tough for me to adapt to. I'd also like an XF300, but again, for $5K I'd rather not invest today in 2010 tech. I'd probably like the 5DMkIII, but it's out of my budget for now. So, I hope this was of some help in pondering the pros and cons.

January 14th, 2014, 09:56 AM	#3
David Dixon Major Player Join Date: May 2011 Location: Knoxville, Tennessee Posts: 495	Re: xf100 replacement anytime soon? Sorry, to answer the question - XF100 replacement anytime soon? I doubt it. Canon seems to be improving the XA series in this price range. I really wish they would come out with updated XF series, but expect that Canon (wrongly, IMHO) probably thinks this is not a market niche worth much attention these days. There is a Sony model PMW-100, I think, that came out after the XF100 and has similar specs. It's a bit costlier, but adds timecode sync like the XF105. There's always the new $2K Sony camera with 4K imaging, but it's too new to really have been tested out.