It's official: Canon XL2 announced

[Dylan Couper]

<<<-- Originally posted by Laurence Maher : Rob,

Good points, and I'll tell you what they tell me . . .

For all the hype, etc. . . . this camera SUCKS!

LOLOLOLOLOOLOLOOLOLOL -->>>

Laurence
Certainly a well educated and biased opinion. On behalf of the rest of the forum, I thank you deeply for sharing it with us. Undoubtably, you have helped set back Canon's marketing department by years. XL2's will be collecting dust on the shelves.
Were there an award that I could give you for this great revelation, I would deliver it to your door in person, as well as a great big cheque for the $5000 you saved me by not spending my money on this "lame duck" of a camera.

Phew....

You 'da man.

Actually, I think you might be bitter because your DVX100 doesn't look like the king of the hill anymore. Pity.

PS, your "L" and "O" keys appear to be broken. I've noticed this in a few of your posts regarding the XL2. New keyboards are cheap these days, I suggest you purchase one.

[Jim Nicholls]

The PAL version has 960X576 pixels which is pretty good. This means it will acquire at higher resolution at 25P than NTSC at 24P. I wonder if the Indie filmakers will rush the PAL model.

Chris must have been on a huge NDA to have all this material ready at launch zero. In terms of marketing the symbiotic relationship between Canon and DVInfo Net have shown how to do it. In any event what a stunning resource. Thank you Chris Hurd and moderators.

As I have been saying for some time now, anyone that buys a prosumer 4:3 camera will be looking at a massive resale value drop... especially now.

Jim

[Nathan Gifford]

Aaron, the way this cam is going to 'kick' is that it is the cheapest in its class to offer lens interchangability. This is a huge advantage when you consider that the XL system can use everything from still cam lenses to primes! Add to that a native 16:9 progressive image processing and you have a pretty impresive system.

If Canon had gone to larger CCDs they probably would have had to abandon the XL lens system. That would have required new lens development and ticking off a bunch of people with stables of XL lens products.

But I am with you on pudding proof. I suspect though that Canon has really taken great care with this system (heck they even have a dust seal on the tape drive cover).

[Steve McDonald]

The XL2 certainly should have a dust seal on the cassette hatch. They're not that complicated or expensive to make. They put one on their LX100 in l991, so they've known all this time how to do it.

In some parts of the world, this dust seal could make a big difference. If I go out on the alkalai flats of the Alvord Desert later this year, I'd want to have one on a camcorder. I once worked around this area on a botanical survey and that nasty dust penetrated everything, no matter how careful we were. Everytime we wandered in from the desert, it took days
to get it out of our skin and noses. Think what it would do to the workings of a VTR.

Steve McDonald

[Ben Gurvich]

Ive never used an xl1, and just wondering, if it can use prime lenses and stuff, why whould you need to get a mini35 to put those lenses on it?

[Aaron Koolen]

Primes will adjust the focal length of the lens and hence cause magnification, and the Depth of Field associated with them is lost.

Aaron

[Aaron Koolen]

Nathan, I guess you've hit it on the head. The interchangeable lens thing has never seemed to me to be a big bonus. With mini35's there are versions that work with fixed lens cameras. I do understand it for those that have a lot of investment in lenses that will work with it. If I was one of those people, it would probably be a no brainer.

Aaron

[Kevin Galliford]

Hey everyone,
Owner of a GL2 here, I want to the New York DV Expo East yesterday, and got a chance to put my hand son the XL2. Its very nice, a little longer then the XL1S. Im not too farmiliar with the XL's But its a really, really nice cam, and its the same price and when the XL1S came out. If you want a real brochure I have one, I wont need it. Lemme know Ill send it to ya!

[Paul Colt]

What is it with all these whiners that didn't get their HDV?! I mean this is the best prosumer camera ( for the price ) out there, until I see a professional review that is. Anyhow I live in Asia and no one cares about HDV , only in the States. If you need HDV go buy a full 1/2 CCD HDV camera and quit whining!
I'm so excited about this new camera to the fine Canon family I hate these whiners raining on the parade!

[Jeff Price]

Not quite so simple for the prosumer side at least. If you are using your XL2 to make videos for money then you have to consider your market. While there is still a huge market for SD there are some segments of the market that now require HD (some PBS for example). Now being able to buy a Viper would be really cool but outside of many freelancer's price range . A great sub $10,000 HD camera would be really nice.

That is not to say you can't upconvert material to HD but not all material will convert adequately. It will certainly help that the XL2 has improved resolution at 16:9 but you still have compression issues.

So it remains a trade-off between price, quality and size of camera. Sort of like the rule of 2/3 for making videos - fast,good,cheap - you can have any 2 of the 3 at the same time.

[Michael Struthers]

There will be some films shot with the Canon XL2, but I think SD has one foot in the grave, unless you are just making really cool home videos.

If you want people to watch/buy your work, you need as much rez as you can get.

First co that puts out a nice hDV cam gets my $$$.

[Rob Moreno]

>Anyhow I live in Asia and no one cares about HDV , only in the States.

In Japan HDV is a huge topic.

[Michael Bott]

Sorry Michael, but that is just nonsense and one of the major reasons people tie themselves in knots ranting about whether one camera is better/worse than the one they haven't got.

Whether or not someone will commission/buy/watch your work has nothing to do with *rez* and everything to do with content, effectiveness, engagement, integrity and creativity. Audiences want to be moved and/or exited - corporations commissioning video want to know that what they are buying will do the job they want it to, not how many pixels they get for their money.

As a professional I will always strive to deliver the best technical quality I can - that's a given. - but they day has yet to come when one of my clients says to me "Hey, Michael - GREAT resolution yo got there!".

[Steve McDonald]

Well, actually, when I first got my new ED-Beta camcorder and VCR setup more than 15 years ago, most people were dazzled by the picture resolution it produced. As long as I did a good job of shooting it, people would eagerly watch anything I had to show and always remarked about how sharp and lifelike it looked. However, I did have some good subjects, mostly beautiful birds and other wildlife.

It shouldn't be a surprise that within a few months, the same people demanded some meaningful content and creative substance, if they were to sit through my video presentations.

Good content can overcome mediocre picture quality, especially with sophisticated audiences. But, high-resolution images will attract people for only a limited time and as they become more experienced as viewers and critics, the subject matter must improve and diversify, to keep them interested.

It's best to have both good content and resolution, although it's likely that if you dwell too much on image quality, you may dilute the effort you can devote to
even more important aspects of your production. I suppose that the more attractive you are physically, the more attention people will give to you at first. But, to keep their interest, you usually have to say and do some noteworthy things.

Steve McDonald

[Peter Koller]

I have not read the whole thread.. please don't kill if this has been addressed before:

If the XL2 has a "true" 16:9 mode and records 960x576 (here in Europe) or 960x480 then shouldn't:

1. The output via Firewire have a higher data rate than 3,5mb/s? Does more resolution not require more data?

2. The tapes run shorter for the same reason?

I mean they cannot change the 5:1 compression, this is a standard, isn't it?


BTW.. I am really pissed off at Canon's pricing policy:

USA: 4,999 USD which equals 3,996 EURO
EU: 5,499 EURO which equals 6,681 USD

So here in Europe we are very happy to pay an extra 1,500 EURO for nothing. Which is a shame considering the currency exchange rate is acutally in our favor (even with the japanese Yen).

Peter