is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

I am looking to buy a used one on ebay for $1000 mainly for wedding and musicals? Unless
someone can tell me an alternative. I need manual controls.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

It's a tape based camera. Check to see if you can buy enough tapes to last you. Tape mechanisms wear down and need service. At some point, Canon will no longer service that camera. The era of tape based cameras has passed. Modern cameras are solid state. Panasonic and JVC have a bunch of nice modern 3-chip cameras to choose from.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

I"d suggest to get a panasonic ag-ac90, that's currently the cheapest camera available that has 3 lens rings to controll focus, iris and zoom. It does have automatic ND's but they are not strong enough to handle bright light and there some other missing features more professional camera's have but considering it's price it's the best you can get if you need more controll.

The xh-a1 was a good camera with much controll and can handle pretty much any situation, except it does not handle low light well, you also have to consider the tapes like Les said meaning long capture times, possible drop-outs unless you get a external capture device like a focus. The tape mechanisme could be an issue but I have here a 15 year old Sony vx1000 that still works and where the tape mechanisme never caused any trouble so it depends. If you plan to use the camera for 3 to 4 years you don't need to worry about Canon not being able to fix it anymore as there at this moment are still stores selling the camera new (the "s" version) but at a reduced price.

I think the main issue with the camera is how it handles low light, 6db gain is about as high as you can go and even then the grain is noticeable so you really need light on camera at weddings, for filming performances it could do well as long as the stage is sufficient lit.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

A thousand dollars is a great price, provided the camera is in good shape. I'm still using both of mine, although I do have to order tapes (in bulk) online. Of course, a tape can be reused just like a memory card can be reused. That's what I do with my 80 minute tapes. Once a I've used a tape and seen that it's had no dropouts all the way through, I KNOW that it's a good tape. ( I have one for football games that has been used at least 20 times with no problems.

Sadly, more and more of the brand new 60 minute tapes have dropouts, approximately 5% of the tapes. Perhaps less emphasis on quality control at the factories since tape is on the way out. I'm ordering another batch of 80 minute tapes, much more expensive, and hope the quality is still there. It's been about two years since the last batch of them.

On every paid shoot, I make sure that at least one of the cameras has a previously used tape that has shown itself reliable. That way if the brand new tape in the other camera has dropouts or other problems... Plus I have an external recorder for the main camera and sometimes capture to a laptop with the second camera.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

I have an XHA1 of my own that I use frequently and one that I borrow from a friend when I need a cutaway cam (for long interviews and speeches). As mentioned here, the biggest challenge with the XHA1 are the tapes. Having a cam with cards or HD is a faster workflow and usually a newer codec that is easier to edit. In the end, there is nothing wrong with the XHA1 as a camera as it shoots HD that looks nice. The images do not look as good as my 5DM2 but I wouldn't expect them to based on differences in the chip and the glass.

If it were me and I was buying a camera today, I would stay away from the XHA1 simply because it is an older technology. There are a number of cameras on the market today (some mentioned in this thread) that will allow you to capture decent video for about the same price as the XHA1 you are looking at.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

Most sub 6000 dollar camera's sold today use the avchd codec which is much harder to edit, HDV otoh edits easy on low end systems.

Actually, the xh-a1 resolves more detail then the 5DII and doesn't suffer from moire and aliasing like the 5DII does so in those respects it's a much better camera but it's mainly in area's like low light the xh-a1 doesn't shine, at all.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

Thanks for all your input. I am not concerned about the tapes, if this camera lasts me 3 years I am happy. If the tapes become an issue, I get an external recorder. At wedding I use an on camera light. Its a variable light. Will this camera do ok with an on camera light at a wedding. For theater that does not matter. there is always enough light. I am looking for a good camera that give me a pic comparable to my PD-150. Will this work ?

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

With light, ofcourse the camera will do well, for stage performances it will be a good replacement for your pd150 but it's not as light sensitive, if you would letterbox the video from your pd and compare it with a 16:9 image from the xh-a1 the canon will give you a sharper image when downconverted to dvd. Just to let you know, I have used a xh-a1 for 4 years and a Sony vx2100 for 3 years so I do know what I"m talking about.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

I really like the Sony look, I am still looking, you know anything about the Sony FX1?

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

No, never used the camera but edited some footage from it, nice colors though (not as flat as the xh-a1) and maybe a bit more light sensitive.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

I think you are better of with a second hand sony fx1000 if you don't need xlr, it is much better in low light then a fx1, it still produces a lot of grain at high gains but its a much finer grain then what you will see on a Canon xh-a1

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

Not adding much here but to reiterate the A1's abysmal low light performance. I've had mine for 5 years and still use it heavily. I love the manual controls and other pro features, but the grain drives me nuts. When I upgrade, I will get a large sensor cam with the option of my own glass. 'Till then, the A1 is still a great cam.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

I know what you mean, the camera does have some other drawbacks, like a too small lcd screen making focussing a bit difficult, but in general it has been a very solid performer and very reliable. I only had an issue when I just got it with a blown firewireport but this could have been my own fault and was replaced by Canon within warranty.
I have my camera on sale now and ordered a sony nex ea50, if the grain the camera produced was finer I probably would never sell it but most of my work involves low light situations and there the camera just doesn't cut it anymore, my cheap dslr's and sony cx730's have served me much better in those area's.
Too bad, I really liked working with that camera and it was a great value considering it's prize and features it got.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

Roger,
How long to you think tapes will be available?

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

Noa, do you like the rolling shutter problem of the sony nex ea50 described as severe?

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

My camera is on order but I don't have it yet so don't know yet how bad it is.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

Just curious, I see you're in Belgium, do you speak French or Dutch?

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

Les,

I don't know if I actually agree with you. A large number of videographers still use their tape based camera given how reliable tape has proven to be. Now the question as to the XHA1 still being a good camera, well that is very subjective. I think that the answer is dependent on two things.

1. What are the expectations of your client?
2. What are you filming

I think that when using this camera to film in a controlled setting or outdoors in a well lit setting, the camera is more than fine. Even if you want to shoot a wedding as I believe the author of this post is wanting to do, this camera is fine; just take a look at all of the videos on Vimeo. Most of the time the biggest problem is the person who is using the camera and doesn't truly now how to maximize the cameras capabilities. The other big problem are the people who like me read a lot of what the pros say on this site and other that at the end of the day is very helpful but irrelevant as it relates to the expectations of my clients. Now that being said, I want to shoot with the best regardless but what really is the best? Can anyone really answer this question definitively? My guess is no because every camera just like the XHA1 has its pros and cons.

Good luck with the camera.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

I also have a couple of XH-A1S cameras that I still use for all my work these days... which is 99% stage shows , plays . etc.

Once you master the camera, it can produce some INCREDIBLE images.... but like others have said learn to play within its low light abilities and you will NOT be disappointed.

I still prefer tape , its reliable, cheap , and available.... although I have to admit that there is the thought in the back of my mind that one day it will be unavailable.... (hope thats not for a few years more) .

Often I have looked around for a possible replacement, and the closest I can come is the new JVC HM600.

Its only a hobby for me, so for now the two I have , (and I still use my XL2 sometimes) work fine for what I do.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

Dave,

I have a similar setup in comparison to what you have. Just curious, do you find your XLH1A has superior footage to your XHA1s. I actually have the older XLH1 and this camera is phenomenal; even in low light.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

Funny you ask that Maurice.... I purchased my XL-H1A first and then a couple years later the XH-A1S. While I have not compared the two side by side, I have to say that I suspect my XL-H1A does a little better job imagewise... however this may all be in my head as the two cameras are supposedly the same on the inside...
Now I also have the optional EXPENSIVE 6x wide lens for my XL-H1A and when I use that , yes it looks a LOT nicer... I must say that lens might be one of the best I have ever used ..... it literally is sharp as a a tack!

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

Although speaking French in my country is very beneficial if you are looking for a job I unfortunately can't speak or understand it so Dutch (or Flemish) is my native language, I also live in the Flemish part of Belgium which is mainly Dutch. I do however understand German very well and speak it a bit but that's because I don't live that far from the German border.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

Dave,

Its my understand that while the two cameras have the same sensor, there are other technological advances in the XLH1/XLH1A/XLH1S that allow the camera to have a better picture. Its interesting what you say about the 6x lens. I have been looking at this lens hoping that the price would come down soon. Now that I've gotten your hands on review, I will seriously consider purchasing this lens. I just didn't want to buy the camera if I'm going to buy a new camera. I was considering the XF300 to capture along side the 5D Mark III and the XLH1 but now Canon has come out with the EOS Cinema cameras. I actually wonder if anyone has done any comparison with the Canon XLH series camera mounted with the 6X along side some of the newer cameras to gage the picture quality. I'm sure that we can all agree that in low light the camera would be inferior but what about in a controlled setting?

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

Hi Maurice.... if you purchase a 6x wide for your H1 you will NOT be disappointed, I too thought a couple times before I added it to my cart when I purchased my XL-H1A from B&H a couple years back.... soon as I put it on the camera and shot some test footage I knew that I made the right choice.... I have used it a couple times and both times been pleased with the results...

You might try looking around for a used one... although I suspect they might be rare?

Happy New Year all!

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

I own the XL1 and from there recently bought the XH-A1. I've had the XL1 since 1998, and I used it solely up until 2 years ago. It's still going strong, without issues with tape mechanisms or other repairs, other than cleaning the heads. It's not as brittle as some seem to think it is, and there's plenty of mini-dv tapes out there still, so you won't find yourself running out any time soon. The XHA1 is a fine tool, too. I have never had anyone ask me for a BlueRay version of any of the games myself, but your use may be different. I do sports (soccer, football, basketball, etc.).

My son has the Panasonic AG-HMC150 and AG-HMC80 and they both use SD cards. When you transfer it all on to DVD, I see no difference between any of it. If you find an XHA1 that's has low usage, and priced just right, then get it.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

I can second this. Having the the 6x Wide for my XL H1S has really been great. Its really sharp and gives a great wide field of view for shooting in tight quarters. Also little to no CA as well. Combined with shooting with the Nanoflash with high bitrates, it gives my camera still many years of life left.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

Though I love my XLH1S/6x Wide Angle/Nanoflash combo and the picture quality is really top notch, the Cinema EOS line is still in another league. I've been doing a lot of shooting with the C300 and just the sheer amount of dynamic range and extremely clean picture just make that system shine in a whole other light.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

So Anthony, did you get the camera?

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

I even used to use the Canon XL HD 6X zoom lens on my old XL2 and it was a huge improvement over the XL 3X lens. The 6X lens was definitely the top of the hill for the XL line of cameras and it was such a pity that the XL-H1/s/a line of exchangeable lens camcorders eventually came to a dead-end.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

Probably killed by a combination of wide zoom range fixed lenses with decent wide FOV on moderate cost camcorders coupled with DSLRs with their extensive range of lens options.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

Yeah I agree. It's too bad the XL line came to an end... it really was a refined system. One can only hope that they are redesigning it into a new interchangeable lens system that maybe uses 2/3" chips. This would be a natural progression for their pro HD camcorder lineup. They could bill it as a small form factor shouldermount HD camcorder that has a dedicated line of lenses for it, but can also use any 2/3" broadcast lens out there.

A huge jump up while still differentiating it from the Cinema EOS line.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

I was thinking the same thing. Canon overreacted to the DSLR market and failed to realize that the traditional camcorder is as alive today as ever. I have the XLH1 camera and I am desperately searching for the 6x wide lens at an affordable price. I've tried to shoot with the 5D Mark III and have done so successfully but as I'm sure most of you know, the DSLR's have their limitations; especially if you're doing a lot of moving shots.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

I've seen several Canon 6X lenses in as-new mint condition over recent weeks sell for well under £550 on Ebay, which is an absolute bargain compared to what they sold for originally. I would have bought another one if I wasn't so heavily involved with DSLR systems. The XL 6X & 20X lenses are now covered with two of my DSLR full-frame f/2.8 zoom lenses on the 5D.

I don't think Canon will ever update the XL range or sell anything like it in the near future. There just isn't enough buyers out there to make it viable. The larger sensor cameras such as video capable DSLRs and C100/C300/C500 seems to be the road they are taking into the future.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

We still regularly use the original XLH1 recording out to a CD flashXDR with both the 6x and 20x lenses.
If you remember, the HD-SDI out port opened up Pandora's Box and allowed this camera to still be highly relevant to this day by shooting XDCAMHD422 at higher data rates than many current cameras.

It was a ground breaking tool that is often forgotten that opened up the world of HD-SDI possibilities at was then an unheard of price point.

And it still is a very useful tool.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

How can I take advantage of the HD-SDI out? Is this what the Nanoflash is for and, if I'm just finalizing my finished product onto a DVD, does it really matter?

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

Videocameras are a tiny fraction of Canons market, still cameras are their main product.

Their DSLR models created a real storm in the video market and shook up their videocamera guys.
The 2 divisions haven't and probably still don't communicate with each other.

On a Caribbean cruise last Nov. with 270 passengers, 90% of shooters used iPads and iPhones,
there were only 3 of us shooting with videocameras. I asked around, the iPadders don't download anything, they just email their stills.
That won't encourage Canon.

Cheers.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

The XL H1 was the 1st low cost HD camera to offer this along with timecode and genlock ports.

The HD-SDI port streams out the uncompressed video signal with 4:2:2 color space. So by using a recorder like the Nanoflash, you can bypass the HDV codec and record to a much higher bitrate, less compressed codec, giving you much higher quality out of the camera. It's given the XL H line much more longevity when compared to other camera back then, along with a simultaneous tape/tapeless workflow solution.

Then original H1 only passed video through its HD-SDI (the latest H1S version passed video/audio/timecode) so keep that in mind.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

The FX1 is inferior to the XH-A1. The newer FX1000 (consumer version of Z5) is a much closer match, but I would still choose the Canon, especially the later "s" model. It has significantly better zoom controls, audio quality (especially the auto control) and auto-focus. The image-stabaliser is more intrusive on the Sony, too. The FX1000 has quite intrusive motor noise, and the plastic body is less rigid than the Canon, and occassionally creaks, especially when hand-held. The only thing the Sony does slightly better is low-light, and that's because it disguises the noise at high gain by "smearing" the image quite a lot. I've spent a lot of time editing footage from XH-A1, XH-A1s, FX1 and FX1000, and know their foibles rather too well.

Some of us still need tape cameras. If you want to retain an archive of your shots, tape is still a simple and effective way to do this. The XH-A1 is a very usable camera and is probably the best HDV camera - with the possible exception of the XL-H1 if you need interchangable lenses and don't mind the extra weight.

I've been thinking about my upgrade path from the XH-A1s, too, but can't see the way to go yet:
- AVCHD needs a change of NLE and major PC upgrade (Avid Liquid doesn't support AVCHD). I'd go this way if it gave me a really good and usable camera;
- PMW-200 and XF300 are a class heavier and more expensive than I want.
- XF100 only has a x10 zoom, and doesn't have the excellent zoom-speed thumb-wheel that I've got so used to using...
I want an "HD XM1" but for the moment, I'm sticking with the XH-A1s with a Sony CF-card recorder.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

FWIW: I switched to EDIUS when Liquid was killed off a few years ago - at that time the learning curve was modest. EDIUS does a great job with AVCHD. Give it a look if you haven't already.

Re: is the Canon XHA1 still a good camera?
 

That's the only part I don't agree with :) I do have a xh-a1 and also have access to a fx1000, at equal gains there is an advantage to the sony but the sony has a much finer grain enabling it to have a "usable" image at much higher gains then what would be acceptable for the canon. To today's standards the fx1000 is still very noisy at 12db + but when it came out I wished I had that camera instead of my Canon, but then mainly for it's much better and more usable higher gain footage. The xh-a1 looks plain ugly at 12db gain while 12db was perfectly usable on the fx1000. In a dim church I have often been swearing silently because I refused to go above 6db knowing my footage would be underexposed and still contained grain but I rather would fix it in post then pushing the gain to 12db. Other then that I think it's one of the best camera's from it's generation, back in a time where Canon charged normal prizes for their camera's ;)