Why is this forum not part of the HDV acquisition forum?

[Bill Pryor]

I agree with that!
What we need is a word that means something like: "One-third inch chip camcorders with enough quality and features to be considered almost totally professional but not quite, yet priced within a range so as to be affordable by independent filmmakers and small production guys." There's probably one of those big long German words beginning with "welt..." that means exactly that.

[Chris Hurd]

Best I could do on short notice, Bill:

Ansage!

Weltbehandlung Elecktronische Zwischenspannung "Einfach Gleich Kamera" mit kleiner 1cm Durchmesser Bildfensterplatte, und Wiedergabekopf, Gegenstreiflicht und Schulterstativ eingebaut.

Ausschalter-Sicherungsautomat und Pannenschalter auf der Verbindungsleiste Verteilerkasten nicht umfaßt.

Enthält einen Regiestuhl und einen Gummi-Hammer.

Kosten: 4,995 EU. Vorhandener: Oktober 2005.

[Thomas Smet]

I could actually see a very large market for HDV use for this camera. For years the wedding market has been buying DSR300's and 500's equal to and well above the $9,000.00 price tag of the XLH1. I would say this has been the largest market for cameras in that price range. Weddings producers wanting to start using HDV may want this camera because of the shoulder mount design. While the JVC is cheaper some wedding people do not like the jittery look of 24p and 30p video. 1080i seems to be what a lot of the wedding people I have talked to want to have right now. For 1080i your options are a Z1/FX1 which is handheld or the Hc1 which is a small single chip camera. I think a lot of the wedding crowd will jump on this camera as finally a highend 1080i camera in their price range. For those producers who already have a Z1/FX1 this is a great highend addition to shoot 1080i with to match as a second camera. The JVC being the only decent 720p camera gives no other camera options right now.

If the XLH1 trully looks great and works great trust me wedding producers will spend $9,000.00 for the camera as well as buy 2 or 3 of them and strictly shoot HDV.

[Chris Basmas]

I'm a wedding producer, and trust me on this, i won't
spend 9K on a new cam, unless is at least 1/2 inch and full shoulder mount with decent low light abilities. This kind of cam will be for sale in less than
a year (i hope). Meanwhile, i have no pressure on me to change format. Most of us can wait and gain. Unless you got a technophiliac bug.

[Luis Caffesse]

I think plenty of wedding videographers will be buying either this camera, or another HDV camera in the coming year. $9K is a bit steep for a wedding camera, but if your market is demanding HD content and you're booking weddings, those cameras will pay themselves off rather quickly.

I knew a guy who shot weddings a while back and he bought a DSR500 to shoot with. This was back when most guys were shooting with VX1000s if they were lucky. He got booked up like crazy just on the strength of the camera. He used to take it to wedding shows with him and have it set up on the tripod behind him in his booth.

There is something to be said for having the best toys on the playground when it comes to business.

(it's not my personal approach, but I've seen plenty of people do it well)

Point is, I think the upper end of the wedding market in large cities will definitely buy into this camera, as well as the JVC.

[Ben Gurvich]

Im wondering why canon are taking the studio route when they have a fairly strong following with the indie film market. And thats ok, but why call it an XL series camera.

Im on the opinion its an HDV cam with an HD SDI output.

Its sort of like calling a Toyota Camry with mag wheels a sports car.

[Luis Caffesse]

Originally Posted by Ben Gurvich

Its sort of like calling a Toyota Camry with mag wheels a sports car.

Actually it's more like calling it a set of mag wheels with a car on it.

:)

[Chris Hurd]

Actually it's more like calling it a set of mag wheels with a car on it.

That's pretty funny, but then you'd have to look at the Panasonic P2 camera the same way. Would you say the HVX200 is "just a DV camera" because it has a DV tape transport? It's the exact same thing with the XL H1, except instead of P2 cards, you're recording to your HD deck of choice.

Now I'm not saying this is "better" than P2 at all... but I find it interesting that we're starting to go through the same gyrations that we did in the early days of our P2 forum, where some folks just didn't get it. The HDV transport on the H1 is no more or less definitive of the camera than the DV transport is on the HVX200.

Originally Posted by Ben Gurvich

Im wondering why canon are taking the studio route when they have a fairly strong following with the indie film market.

"Had" is more like it... that market is now firmly owned by Panasonic. If you ask me, that's the primary reason for the shift to the studio route.

[Robert Mann Z.]

Originally Posted by Chris Hurd

Would you say the HVX200 is "just a DV camera" because it has a DV tape transport? It's the exact same thing with the XL H1, except instead of P2 cards, you're recording to your HD deck of choice..

your wrong there, the hvx200 actually gives you an option to Record dv and hd on the camera where with the xl h1 you can only Record hdv,

lets not forget its called a:
cam(era)(re)corder...
not a cam(era)(out)putter(with)op(ional)de(ck)(purch)ase...

my optura gives me firewire out with software to use it as a web cam by canon...should i call it a web cam? or a dv cam?

I'll see if your position makes any sense when in a few years every hdv camera starts to have hd-sdi...

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Robert Mann Z.

lets not forget its called a:
cam(era)(re)corder...

You can call it that if you want. I'm calling it an "HD camera." I stand by my prediction that the majority of its buyers will seldom if ever put a tape in it.

It all boils down to one thing... what are you going to use it for. If you use your Optura primarily as a webcam, then sure it's a webcam. If it never leaves your desk, if you never put a tape in it, if you have DV Messenger fired up all the time, then yes it's a webcam.

[Bill Pryor]

If you look at it that way, the Z1 and even the single chip HDV cameras are really HD cameras that record to DV tape. HDV is a type of HD.

Canon's marketing strategy is going to be interesting. They're sort of cutting in on JVC's turf by going after small TV stations and corporate in house and institutional production units that do multicam setups. JVC seems to have had a pretty tight lock on that market for years. Of course nobody thought that Panasonic could kick Betacam SP out of TV news with a DV25 format either.

Maybe Canon will sell big time to that market. However, you still go to their consumer division for info on the camera. A slick JVC salesman would say something like, "Well...sure you can go with Canon, but it's a consumer product. WE are a professional group and support our customer base that way. What are you gonna do--take your camera to Best Buy to have it fixed?"

My point is, Canon still sells it as a consumer product, which is a bit ridiculous. If they truly are going after a new market, somebody should let their marketing department know.

[Chris Hurd]

Originally Posted by Bill Pryor

If you look at it that way, the Z1 and even the single chip HDV cameras are really HD cameras that record to DV tape. HDV is a type of HD.

HDV is indeed a type of HD. Further to your point, Bill, I think it's interesting when one compares the actual branding on the Canon XL2 and XL H1, on the left side by the power dial.

XL2: "3CCD Digital Video Camcorder"
XL H1 "3CCD HD Video Camera Recorder"

There's a reason why the H1 camera isn't labeled "camcorder" like the XL2 was. Although if you go to the Canon DV website, then hey, it's a "3CCD camcorder." A marketing mistake in my opinion. Which leads me to firmly agree with you on your second point, that they definitely have their work cut out for them and it'll be a tough row to hoe for a department whose background lies in consumer marketing. I certainly don't envy their position.

Another thing worth realizing though is that this just one model, for crying out loud. Who's to say the next one won't represent a shift back to some other market, be it indie filmmaking or whatever?

[Thomas Smet]

Doesn't the XLH1 say HDV on the side?

The difference between the H1 and the HVX200 is that with the HVX200 and P2 you have a method of recording HD without any other equipment. This is the advantage of P2. High quality HD recording in the field. The H1 "must" use "optional" extra equipment in order for it to record any other type of HD. That is why I consider this a HDV camera that has the option for higher end HD. HDV is native to this camera. Just like DV and P2 recording are native to the HVX200 and DVCAM is native to the DSR570.

I can just as easily use uncompressed from the Z1 with the same "optional equipment. It might be analog and I might need a converter in between but if you are hauling around an extra deck why not haul an extra analog to SDI adapter that weighs a few ounces?

I almost get the feeling that Canon thinks HDV sucks which is why they don't want people to feel as though this is a HDV camera. HDV is the native recording format of the H1 so it is HDV. If the deck could be removed you may have a case but since the deck is built in this is not a camera head but a camcorder. While some users may use it strictly for studio work with SDI great super but it is still a HDV camera that is being used as a camera head. So are us users that would use it as a HDV camera stupid for using it that way? Should we not use it to record HDV because it isn't really a HDV camera?

If a camera has a native recording format built in you kind of have to call it as that. The SONY F900 also has optional SDI ports but nobody calls that a camera head but a HDCAM camera. The Panasonic Varicam has 2 HD-SDI ports built in and it is still a DVCPROHD camera and not a camera head

[Bill Pryor]

If I were their marketing guru, I'd want the same camera without the expense of the SDI output and genlock, so I could sell it cheaper to the indy filmmakers who are buying Z1s, etc. Get it down to $6K, and it might become the camera of choice for low end HD. Having the studio package available too is good if somebody needs it.

I think it's a good move, actually, trying to get into that market that JVC has always had. The thing they're selling against, though, is the new JVC HDV camera. It can give component HD out, I think, so a station would have to buy a box, but that's not a huge deal. I personally would prefer the Canon with SDI, but if you're an organization already immersed in JVC stuff, it might be a hard sell.

I guess if we start seeing HD broadcasts from Lindsborg, KS, in the near future, we can speculate that Canon is having some success. Still, I think there's going to be a heck of a lot of TV station technogeek inertia to overcome for the engineers to deal with a "consumer product" over their established suppliers. Canon should take a page from what Sony did back in the '80s--they had a specatular (for its time) tube camera that sold in the "professional" division for under $10K. The M7. Everybody used it with the BVW35 deck. Sony made the case darker and sold the same basic camera to TV stations for almost double the price. It was a "broadcast" camera. A little heavier duty and a better color, but the same basic thing. Probably it was analogous to the difference between the PD170 and the DVX2100. One is "consumer" and one is "prosumer" (arrgghh--there's that dreaded non-word again) but you can do about the same thing with both of them. Problem is, Canon already made the new camera professional photographer black, rather than orange and white. They should have made it orange and white for the indy filmmakers and charged $2500 less. Then the "broadcast" one could have been black, sold as a "broadcast HD camera" and they'd kick some JVC butt. Drop the genlock in the orange and white one.
It's all about image, duuude.

Att'n: Canon Marketing Department--please contact me and I will provide consulting services for $100 per hour. Thanks.

[Kevin Wild]

After thinking about this, I'm really surprised that Canon didn't sell this whole SDI "Jackpack" as an option and not a feature. I'd love this camera around $6k, but not sure I'm willing to shell out an extra $3k for "features" I won't use.

Kevin