Canon XF200/205

[David Heath]

Interesting, but it seems expensive considering it's a single 1/3" chip, and at 1920x1080 can't give full HD resolution.

For that sort of money, I'd really expect three chip at least, and personally find 1/2" models like the PMW200/300 well worth the extra in this class of camera.

[David Dixon]

I don't see that spec about upgraded AVCHD like the C series has - the only 1080p60 is recorded as .mp4 - no thanks.

I love my XF100, and this has some nice features, but as far as IQ - I'm definitely not tempted to upgrade.

I got my XF100 in May 2011, and the only competition from Panasonic was the HMC40 - its poor low light knocked it out of the running.

Today the Panasonics are stronger but pricier competitors, although I love the small size of my XF100 and have been happy with the 10x zoom.

What I really wish is that Canon would introduce a C150 or something, so I could buy a used C100 for about $2500 :-)

And, the XFs do have full 1080 HD resolution, just not 60p (that's at 720p only). The PMW200 is twice the price of this - a totally different class of camera. The PMW 100 competes with these.

[Jonathan Levin]

Wow. Remote control with IPad or IPhone? Three ring circus on lens. I'm in.

[Pete Bauer]

Originally Posted by David Heath

Interesting, but it seems expensive considering it's a single 1/3" chip, and at 1920x1080 can't give full HD resolution.

For that sort of money, I'd really expect three chip at least, and personally find 1/2" models like the PMW200/300 well worth the extra in this class of camera.

I have to side with David on the HD resolution. I've shot XF105 and XF305 side-by-side many times and yes, the 305 wins but the image quality difference is surprisingly minimal. I often can't tell without direct A/B comparison during editing at full resolution which camera shot which clip (or cheating and looking at the file names).

As far as cost, value is subjective. The XF105 started out at the same price so I guess I personally wouldn't consider the XF205 overpriced.

EDIT: I was agreeing with David Dixon about the "full HD" quality of XF cameras.

[Tim Polster]

Originally Posted by David Dixon

And, the XFs do have full 1080 HD resolution, just not 60p (that's at 720p only).

I think that David was reffering to the fact that a single sensor chip can not achieve a full 1080 lines of resolution once the imaging color processing is completed. I am no expert but I think this is called de-bayering. Three chips can achieve the full 1080p lines of resolution as the color information is divided between the three chips - RGB.

That is for lab techs to consider :) I would be confident that the XF200 will have a great image.

[Glen Vandermolen]

This is a complete surprise. Looks like a sweet little camera package.

[David Heath]

Originally Posted by Tim Polster

I think that David was reffering to the fact that a single sensor chip can not achieve a full 1080 lines of resolution once the imaging color processing is completed. I am no expert but I think this is called de-bayering.

Correct. It's not just resolution, but coloured aliasing and various other things will be worse as well.

A 1920x1080 Bayer single chip has red and blue counts of only 960x540 - which is simply not as good as a three chip design when all the colours are full 1920x1080.

The other point is that being single chip, it will inevitably be less sensitive than a three chip design (all else equal), and by a factor of over a stop. Arguably, this may be more relevant than the resolution differences.

None of this is to say it will be "bad" - but it won't - can't - be as good as an equivalent three chip design, of the same basic sensor size.

[Chris Hurd]

First post in this thread has been updated to include a link to the full press release here at DV Info Net.

Also, I've uploaded eight images of the XF205 to that post as well.

Meanwhile I'm digging the rotating handgrip (XF200 shown here):

[Emmanuel Plakiotis]

According yo Cnet besides the optical stabilization it uses electronic stab. That's why the chip is slightly larger than 1/3.
Nowhere is said that the chip is only 1920X1080 pixels. Could be more...

[Chris Hurd]

The extra pixels on that chip belong to an EIS system that works with the OIS system (in the lens) to provide a five-axis stabilizer. This from CUSA's Larry Thorpe via the B&H video embedded in the first post of this thread.

[Anthony Lelli]

now we have cameras following the latest fashion closely : the front finally shows the tongue out ala miley cyrus . Interesting. and the front is what they see when we shoot. Impressive.

[Emmanuel Plakiotis]

From Canon website:
"Capture more than ever thanks to the XA20’s stunning new 26.8mm wide angle lens. A 20x zoom gets you closer to the action, while Dynamic Optical Image Stabilisation compensates for shake in 5 directions to provide ultra-steady images. f/1.8 maximum aperture, an 8-blade iris and EDM technology enable beautiful ‘bokeh’ effects.
Canon XA 25 1/2.84” HD CMOS Pro sensor
With an effective pixel count of approximately 2.91 megapixels, the new Canon HD CMOS sensor delivers stunning picture quality – even in low light – as well as outstanding dynamic range and realistic colour reproduction."


Since it seems that the 200/205 matches exactly the front element of the XA20/25 isn't far fetched to assume that it will sport the same higher resolution 2.91mp sensor which I think has enough pixels for true 1080 debayered image?

[Emmanuel Plakiotis]

Actually it does.

In the newest Canon brochure, it states that the 200 has 2.91 mp vs 2.07 mp of the 105

http://downloads.canon.com/cpr/softw...Spring2014.pdf

[Steven Ansell]

The new cameras appear to have the same sensor as the G30/XA20/25. The extra pixels are used for dynamic image stabilization. They seem to have the same lens as well, and definitely the same processor.

In fact, these two new cameras look like repackaged XA20/25s, with a few new bits added (such as CF slots and three user rings instead of one), bundled with the MXF meg2 codec. So, they have cannibalized parts of the XA20/25 and XF300/305, and stuck them together.

This has to be a stop gap product to cover for their 4K technology in that market group not being ready yet.

[Mark Watson]

I'm not seeing any built-in ND filters on this one.