canon XH A1s

[Ian Thomas]

well I might be the only one on here that has this opinion but I have been working with the old XHA1s I have also got the canon HF G30 and the panny GH4 and to be honest in good light the old camera give's me a more pleasing picture its sharp very good colour and side by side in hd of course it matches or to my eye is slightly better than the other two, in fact I like it more than the newer canon which has the digi 4 processer compered to the 2 on the old camera even watching some old close up work on a HVR10 you can't see any difference with the newer camera.

So the morale to the story is even though its an old tape camera it can still match in the right hands the newer camera's so unless you have to there's nothing wrong with keeping your tape camera tape is still plentiful and is easy to work with.

[Chris Hurd]

My vote for Post Of The Day.

Thanks, Ian!

[Noa Put]

Ah sweet memories, I had a xh-a1 and I was not happy when Canon didn't make a replacement model at the same pricepoint, I felt that the xf100 was a step back the xf300 was too expensive. I also loved working with that camera, the only thing I will not miss is how noisy it was, shooting in a church was a challenge and already 6db of gain made the bugs crawl all over the screen. Shooting in the venue was a nightmare, all guests hated my videolight. :)

[Ian Thomas]

Thanks Chris

Yes Noa not so clever in lowlight but I think we are to quick to diss our camera's because new one's come out with all the hype that there better at this and better at that I have had some of the supposedly top camera's that's cost me an arm and a leg and it make any difference in sales people don't care what camera you use as long the content is interesting, And I have had the EX1/EX3/ PMW320 all great cameras but iam still amazed at the quality of the canon, My friend has the EX3 and the Z1 and still finds himself going for the Z1.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Noa Put

...I felt that the xf100 was a step back the xf300 was too expensive.

The XF200 is the sweet spot. Of the XF series, it's most like the XH A1S.

[Noa Put]

The problem was that when I wanted to upgrade the xf200 didn't exist yet. :)

[Larry Secrest]

Actually, I found the same thing.
I have a XH A1 and a Lumix G7 and I must say that in full broad daylight, the canon is better. When I grade both footage in resolve and apply Cineconvert to it, the XH A1 is actually better. That is blowing my mind.
Too bad it's tape based.

[Noa Put]

You can always connect a recorder to it, that's what I did using a sony hvr-dr60 after I had experienced a tape failure, the sony recorder worked flawlessly over the 2 years that I used it.

[Ian Thomas]

Yes Larry the camera does give some impressive results plus tape is still great media for saving footage too, and here in the UK is still plenty full.

You never know tape cassettes have come back might be tape camera's next!!!

[George Dean]

This is a bit off topic.....I have been using an XLH1 for the past two years recording to a Atomos Samurai Blade using tape as backup. I have never been disappointed in the results (with adequate lighting). Recently I have been using a GH4 and find the XLH1 holds up to the GH4 HD 8 bit when letting the GH4 reduce from 4K to 1080p. If I record in 4K and then down it to 1080p in Vegas/Resolve, the XLH1 footage falls a bit short. I agree the XL and XH are great cameras that can hold their own within their capabilities.

[David Jenkinson]

Yep, I agree. I use the XH A1S with a Datavideo DN60a, and shoot to both tape and card (with the tape version acting as a back up). I'm very happy with the images it produces, and its easy to edit, once clipwrapped, in Final Cut Pro 7. I made a bracket that attaches the DN60 to the handle and use a 5" monitor screen (for a car rear view camera) as a viewfinder. (I shoot professional football for Dumbarton FC find the channel at https://www.youtube.com/SonsTVDumbartonFC).

I really like the handling of the Canon, and having recently had it serviced I am hopeful of it lasting for a long time! I recently compared it's iq with the output of a JVC GY HM600 and was very pleased with how it handled a tricky lighting situation. It is to be honest probably more noisy than I would like in darker scenes but in good lighting it is an excellent performer.

In the past, as a film based stills enthusiast, I was often drawn into the "get the new, modern, updated, super-dooper latest etc" camera, or looked for the "best" lens, fastest etc. I realise looking back that (although I was very pleased with some of the images I produced) it was really the gear I was more interested in.

Now, older, ?wiser, I realise it's not the gear (although having the right camera for the job is a BIG help) as much as it is the way you use it that really counts. For what I do, the Canon is an excellent, sturdy and (so far) very reliable tool.

Dave

[Ian Thomas]

just out of interest David were did you get it serviced, what did they do and how much? and I agree with all you have said its a fine camera

[Maurice Covington]

It's always funny to me how quickly current camera are dismissed just as soon as something new comes out. A lot of the posts are spot on if not all of them. I used to shoot only with the XL and XH series and too believe that there is absolutely still a place for them. While they are not always the 1st choice when shooting indoors under natural light, if you can control the light or are outside, you're going to be fine with these cameras. There is something about the look of these cameras but I'll be honest, despite Canon trying to convince me that the XH and XL have the same sensor, picture coming out of the XL series is amazing.

Also, glad to here about the quality of the XF200. I have an XF100 and think very highly of the footage that I get from it. But then again, I have an XF300 and a C100 that I love too.

[David Jenkinson]

Originally Posted by Ian Thomas

just out of interest David were did you get it serviced, what did they do and how much? and I agree with all you have said its a fine camera

It was serviced by A J Johnstone in Glasgow. i think they had it for two weeks, about £160 or so. they were a little worried about the age of the camera, and offering a guarantee that servicing = nothing would go wrong, but the camera came back to me as good as new!

cheers

Dave


ps they cleaned and lubed tape transport / eject, cleaned the heads, zoom function smoother, in general returned to good as new!

[Ian Thomas]

thank you for that Dave