Post questions for the Canon Product Manager

[Michael Wisniewski]

Originally Posted by Eric Brown

... XL-H1 viewfinder is capable of doing color/monochrome switching, not just reduced color like the XL2.

The color EVF has a B/W mode, I'm unaware of how it technically achieves it.

[George Johnston]

I may be the exception but I had the XL1 and the XL2 and had both 16x and 20x prime lenses and bought the 3x WA (Wide Angle) lenses. The XL1 was a disaster as the viewfinder was nothing short of useless. The XL2 was far better but I had reservations from my XL1 days and that was the interchangable lens. My fear was always getting dust onto the protective glass just behind the lens flange on the camera, therefore I very rarely used the 3x WA lens. My point to all this is that not everyone likes to remove the lens and Canon should have brought out a 20x lens which had a better WA. Everyone without exception likes a WA lens perspective but not everyone is keen to keep removing the 20x lens and anyway this lens is not practicle in a lot of live events where you can't or don't have the time to swap lenses so could Canon produce a 16x WA lens for the H1 please.

[Alexander Ibrahim]

Originally Posted by George Johnston

Everyone without exception likes a WA lens perspective but not everyone is keen to keep removing the 20x lens and anyway this lens is not practicle in a lot of live events where you can't or don't have the time to swap lenses so could Canon produce a 16x WA lens for the H1 please.

Well, I like the idea, but I'd vote for a 20x 3.5-70mm lens f1.6/2.6. I hope that this might be acheivable in a full manual HD lens. Also, I'd like to see a real iris control, not stepped digital control.

That would be an excellent standard lens. That is a lens that I might never need to take off the camera.

I'd also like a selection of high performance prime XL HD lenses. These should mostly be in the wide angle range, like ~2.5mm

Further, I'd love to see the XL-EOS adapter reduced in price some so I could use EOS primes for my telephoto range. I've only seen EOS lenses used with the XL-1S (not mine- this is pure envy at work) and they produced nice sharp images.

It could be a real alternative to all those mini-35 rigs if done properly.

One thing I question considering the direction the XL H1 is taking is why Canon didn't simply use a 1/3" bayonet mount compatible with the JVC camera.

It seems both Canon and JVC would benefit from such an arrangement because of economies of scale.

My guess is that features like autofocus aren't practical with that arrangement, but I don't know. I'd like to see the professional mounting systems extended to provide that sort of functionality. Canon could certainly drive this.

Autofocus is going to be very important to HD shooters. It is very hard to judge focus with viewfinders even from high end cameras. Even on the Panavision HDCAM's you can misjudge.

Inexperienced camera people will need help.

[Ozzie Alfonso]

Originally Posted by George Johnston

My point to all this is that not everyone likes to remove the lens and Canon should have brought out a 20x lens which had a better WA. Everyone without exception likes a WA lens perspective but not everyone is keen to keep removing the 20x lens.

I recently sold my XL1 and kept my XL1s. The XL1 went with the "standard" zoom and I kept the WA with the XL1s. I kept the wide angle because I found myself using it more often in interior shoots. I hardly ever needed to change lenses, although often I wished I had a longer zoom. I agree that Canon really needs to bring out a high quality 20x zoom with a reasonable wide angle end. (Especially true since Canon takes pride on the quality of its optics.) I wish they stopped using the "#x" and just publish the wide and long focal lengths. This might be confusing for beginners but then the H1 is not being marketed to beginners.

Regarding auto focus - as long as the view finder is not hires it is a good thing, but a hires VF that "sizzles" when an image is in focus would be a better idea. This is common in most high end cameras. Okay, hires b&w VF cost a lot but they are worth it especially in this market.

BTW, which camera do I use most often? My Sony TRV900 - easy to carry, easy to shoot, and the picture is almost "intercutable" with the Canon. For down and dirty shooting there is no better camera.

[Nick Hiltgen]

While it would be nice to see an actual canon rep on the boards, I do think that they are watching anyone take a look at the xl2 wish list, all of the wildest requests (HD, interchangable lenses. TC in and out a switchable viewfinder for 35 adapters even 24p -ish and greater still camera abilities) have been incoporated into the xl-h1. I think that says something about canon's concern with what the dvinfo users have to say.

I think a 3.5mm 20x wide lens may be a little difficult, I mean a legitmiate 4.7x11 lens for 2/3 inch camera's is 30k+. It would be great to have a wide angle (specificlally a manual one) but I think a 20x wide is a pretty tall order.

Also I think it would probably be cheaper to buy mini35 setup and film primes then a set of hd primes built specfically for this camera.

I do have a question, if someone were to buy this camera and want to use it only for cine style shoots how much do you think they could get for the lens to put toward a mini 35 adapter? Oh and what's the deal on my fa-200? can I use it with this camera or not?

[Chris Hurd]

Oh I can guarantee that they watch DV Info Net closely. Not posting or participating is strictly a matter of internal corporate policy. Perhaps we should organize a petition on behalf of the Watchdog? Maybe there would be some sort of response to that.

[Yi Fong Yu]

chris, there could be a direct line of communication between DVI pros using the gear on a frequent basis and Canon themselves. it doesn't have to be everyday but once every year, half year isn't so hard to ask. monthly is stretching it. i think every 1/2 year. and this ain't just canon but Sony, Panasonic, JVC or any other manufactures. i mean us DVI'ers are pretty much a big part of the market. after awhile, consumers around the internet will realize DVI is one of the sole sources directly in touch with the R&D dept of those companies and will come onboard and signup. of course, it also means competitor boards can do similar things =).

HD wide lens is a must. so hopefully, they'll have their own 3x-like HD lens with the wazoo included.

this makes me wanna go back with XL2.

[Dean Rogers]

Is there an equivalent 2X extender for the XL H1 as for the XL-1/2?

[Chris Hurd]

I think you mean the Canon XL 1.6x Extender... and no this is not recommended for the XL H1 because its optical elements are made to SD specs, not HD.

[Dean Rogers]

You are right, the XL extender is a 1.6X.

I am only interested if there is an HD extender for the 20X HD lense that comes with the HD unit. Do you know? I wouldn't expect the XL-1 extender to work. Thanks for your help.

Dean

[Robert Niemann]

Why did Canon not build in cheap progressive recording CCDs (e.g. for native 720p) and then use pixel shifting to get 1080p?

[Dean Rogers]

Still wondering if anyone knows if there will be an HD extender for the 20X lens that comes with the XL H1. Anyone know?

Thanks, Dean

[Chris Hurd]

For Dean, no announcement has been made regarding an HD extender, but I would be surprised if one is not in the works!

[Gary McClurg]

Chris, any word on footage?

Of course like everyone its the 24F footage I'm interested in?

[Chris Hurd]

Hi Gary,

I have a movie clip from my digicam in which I shot the XL H1 image right off the monitor. I'll have it available here shortly, just as soon as I can work out the bugs...