You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

Canon XL H1 *New*

Posted: Sat, 17th Sep 2005, 11:58pm

Post 1 of 32

wdy

Force: 1700 | Joined: 30th Dec 2002 | Posts: 1258

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User MacOS User

Gold Member

The new Canon XL H1 has arrived! Now featuring high definition.. but still no 24p. Read up on it. Looks like it may do well in the market if you have $9000 in your pocket.

http://www.camcorderinfo.com/content/Canon-Announces-HDV-High-Definition-XLH1-with-1080i-with-No-24P.htm

http://consumer.usa.canon.com/ir/controller?act=ModelDetailAct&fcategoryid=165&modelid=12152
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 12:35am

Post 2 of 32

ssjaaron

Force: 1545 | Joined: 11th Jan 2003 | Posts: 1115

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

I want that! canon is my favorite Camera brand! and now the time is here! DUN DUN DAA! this rocks! i think it awsome a Canon HD this is really cool to me. i will do more read up, but does anyone know where i can see some footage of it in Action!?
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 12:44am

Post 3 of 32

Aculag

Force: 8365 | Joined: 21st Jun 2002 | Posts: 8581

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

This camera will go over very well in broadcasting because of the SDI outputs, and ease of use of HDV, however I don't think it will excel in the area of indie filmmakers. I think that market will be completely taken over by the Sony FX1, and Panasonic HVX200.

Personally, I'm on Panasonic's side. Even though I love my XL1s, I don't really think Canon is working on the side of filmmaking as much as Panasonic is. Canon definitely seems more towards the broacast angle.
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 12:46am

Post 4 of 32

wdy

Force: 1700 | Joined: 30th Dec 2002 | Posts: 1258

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User MacOS User

Gold Member

Not sure that any has been released yet. There's forums all over the place though you check into. Definately give it some time and I'm sure they'll be some demonstration. I'm curious of how it will shape up to the Sony HDR FX1.
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 2:04am

Post 5 of 32

Lithium Kraft

Force: 2728 | Joined: 10th Jun 2005 | Posts: 538

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I love my Pana camera. Just yesterday I discovered it even does widescreen, which I quite liked. Like Aculag, I'm on Panasonic's side.
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 2:11am

Post 6 of 32

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Man, I can't wait till HDV becomes affordable...
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 2:11am

Post 7 of 32

Bugclimber

Force: 1305 | Joined: 7th Jul 2004 | Posts: 635

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

I'm happy with my GL2 smile
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 2:12am

Post 8 of 32

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Darn you...
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 3:32am

Post 9 of 32

wdy

Force: 1700 | Joined: 30th Dec 2002 | Posts: 1258

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User MacOS User

Gold Member

GL2 is a great camera! I just sold mine and bought a Canon XL1s.
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 4:57am

Post 10 of 32

andrewzennfilms

Force: 1000 | Joined: 13th Dec 2003 | Posts: 31

EffectsLab Pro User VideoWrap User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Actually the new Canon XL H1 does have 24p. It also has many other shooting modes like 30fps. But it still seems to expensive, even compared to the other current hd cameras from sony.
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 5:50am

Post 11 of 32

wdy

Force: 1700 | Joined: 30th Dec 2002 | Posts: 1258

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User MacOS User

Gold Member

It is not real 24P though. It does however have movie like 24P.
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 6:14am

Post 12 of 32

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Does 24p REALLY matter? I mean.......does it? You can convert later on, can't you?
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 6:21am

Post 13 of 32

wdy

Force: 1700 | Joined: 30th Dec 2002 | Posts: 1258

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User MacOS User

Gold Member

Some what. Although alot of people like to use the feature of 24p with their camera. Exactly why alot of people like the panny. Now people are surprised that Canon hasn't yet put out a camera with true 24p when clearly customers are after it. They were some what dissapointed when the XL2 came out and it didn't have HD or 24p. Now they have the HD with the HL1, although still not true 24p.

Now it all matter to the buyer. In my opinion I don't necessarly need the 24p. To me the HL1 looks like a great camera and I believe the price suits it. People just complain its too expensive cause their you and don't have that kind of money. People.. its a high end camera.. ofcourse its going to cost more.

This is just a discussion about people's thought on the camera. Everyone is entitled to their own point of view. I mean everyone has their own taste for camera features and their own feel for a camera. Its all what suits the operator.

Last edited Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 6:24am; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 6:24am

Post 14 of 32

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

GL2 or XL1s are both great cameras for a Prosumer, I don't see why people with not that huge of a budget try to scrub up the money to go to a thus-far-undeveloped HDV when good 3CCD cameras are out there.
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 6:28am

Post 15 of 32

wdy

Force: 1700 | Joined: 30th Dec 2002 | Posts: 1258

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User MacOS User

Gold Member

I couldn't agree more. I mean people don't need top end cameras. I started off with a little hi8mm and worked my way up. Why spend thousands of dollars on a camera and later find out you have no more interest in video making. Also you could have world coolest camera.. but do you really know how to use it properly. I'd rather watch a well plotted story on in fuzzy quality then watch some guy filming his feet with his HD camera. Lot's of people forget about the main aspects to creating a good movie. The type of camera should be your last though on a project, unless I mean your doing this for a living and have lots of knowledge and understanding. Just before you jump any where... start witht he basics.
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 6:41am

Post 16 of 32

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

You can't forget that if you waste all your cash on an HD camera, you're stuck with not enough hard disk space, no money to upgrade, and no equipment to steady the most-likely heavy camera. Hence, HDV= lame, GL2= awesome.
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 6:44am

Post 17 of 32

wdy

Force: 1700 | Joined: 30th Dec 2002 | Posts: 1258

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User MacOS User

Gold Member

I wouldn't say its lame. HD is great... its the new generation of TV and Film.
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 6:56am

Post 18 of 32

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

24p is VERY noticable for the most part. I wish my vx2100 had it so i wouldnt have to convert it everytime. the fact that both JVC and Panasonic have MUCH cheaper cams with 24p and true HD and such, canon messed up with this cam. $9000? that's just canon exploiting there name. Screw that.

The new panasonic hvx200 looks like the coolest thing since sliced bread. I want that cam so bad, i might just rob a bank.

And HDV isn't nearly as good as true HD 24p. That little faked 24p ain't that great. progressive looks QUITE abit better than interlaced in almost every case.

And yeah, if you want true HD then you may as well get one of those Terabyte harddrives. If you have the money for the pana, you should consider the harddrive as part of the cameras cost.
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 10:18pm

Post 19 of 32

Aculag

Force: 8365 | Joined: 21st Jun 2002 | Posts: 8581

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

wdy wrote:

I wouldn't say its lame. HD is great... its the new generation of TV and Film.
He didn't say HD is lame. He said that HDV is lame. Which it is.
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 10:41pm

Post 20 of 32

wdy

Force: 1700 | Joined: 30th Dec 2002 | Posts: 1258

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User MacOS User

Gold Member

Sorry my bad.
Posted: Sun, 18th Sep 2005, 10:53pm

Post 21 of 32

ben3308

Force: 5210 | Joined: 24th May 2004 | Posts: 6433

VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Bryce007 wrote:

24p is VERY noticable for the most part.
Yeah, but come on, paying the extra price of buying a camera with 24p instead of taking just a little time to convert it at render time? That's lazy.
Posted: Mon, 19th Sep 2005, 1:21am

Post 22 of 32

Aculag

Force: 8365 | Joined: 21st Jun 2002 | Posts: 8581

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

ben3308 wrote:

Yeah, but come on, paying the extra price of buying a camera with 24p instead of taking just a little time to convert it at render time? That's lazy.
You're not paying for 24p, you're paying for overall quality of the camera. Compare the DVX-100 to the XL1s, for instance. The DVX-100 is cheaper, and prodces a better image than the XL1s, in addition to providing true 24p. The XL1s has interchangeable lenses, but I don't think most people chose to dish out the extra money for those.

The HD generation of cameras we're seeing now are all going to have their perks. Canon has SDI output, Panasonic has 1080p and variable frame rates, Sony has.. those cool lcd's.
Posted: Mon, 19th Sep 2005, 3:20am

Post 23 of 32

LilCaesars

Force: 480 | Joined: 27th Dec 2004 | Posts: 530

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

I love my dvx100a and ben something just looks different between true 24p and converted 24p
Posted: Mon, 19th Sep 2005, 8:09am

Post 24 of 32

jotoki

Force: 1855 | Joined: 28th Dec 2001 | Posts: 630

VisionLab User Windows User

Gold Member

Well this looks like a nice piece of kit but it's way overpriced. That said for the market that it's aimed at a high price is expected so it's not surprising and will probably work in Canons favour. In the end it's not that much more than an XL2 with High Def and that doesnt warrant the massive price difference but I'm sure Canon will sell plenty just based on brand loyalty and no doubt it will get the job done and then some. You do kind of get the feeling that Canon is trying to get this cam out of the Indie market and into the broadcast, perhaps trying to change the image of the XL range for whatever reason but good luck to them with what looks like a great piece of kit. I wont be buying one though. Cant be long before we see an XM HD1 ? Now that should give real value for money.

As for HDV being Lame. Well I have an XM2 and also have HDV eqiupment. The XM2 hardly gets any use these days, there is no comparison between the images produced by the two formats. It doesnt use more disk space (HD does but HDV does not), I've had no dropouts with standard MiniDV tapes used (another HDV myth). With the upcoming HD-DVD and BLU RAY disks and the fall in prices of HDTV ready TV's in the UK at any rate, plus sky TV coming online with HD next year HD is the place to be and price wise HDV is the only way to go unless you have stacks of money to spare. it's probably gonna end up like MiniDV and DVcam. HD for Fully fledged Pros and HDV for indie, enthusiasts and consumers. Ask Solthar, he uses HDV, he doesn't think it's lame. In the end do you follow the crowd or lead it I guess you have to ask yourself which. Calling this format lame is kind of ill informed really. Shame coz Ben is often quite on the ball with stuff he comes up with. Sadly wide of the mark in this case though.
Posted: Mon, 19th Sep 2005, 8:22am

Post 25 of 32

Joshua Davies

Force: 25400 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 3029

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

FXhome Team Member

God, Canon went with HDV - thats a shame but then Canon aren't really known for professional equipment.

I can't see broadcasters using this camera - HDV is such a bad format when it comes to dropouts and Canon hardly have a glowing reputation for quality at the moment. Our XM2 (PAL version of GL2) has a broken tape deck after less than 15hours of recording and, if you look online, it seems to be the case with many owners of XM2/GL2 and some of the other higher end Canon cameras.

The Panasonic P2 cameras look much better to me and are far less limited - they even start at a cheaper price. Within a year or so 32GB P2 cards will be quite cheap and have none of the limitations of HDV, no moving parts and vasty better quality.
Posted: Mon, 19th Sep 2005, 8:38am

Post 26 of 32

cantaclaro

Force: 2036 | Joined: 24th Oct 2001 | Posts: 875

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Schwar my GL2 just crapped out too. Canon is now on my no trust list right above JVC.

In the mean time I went ahead and picked up an FX1 and am enjoying the hell out of it. HDV might not be the future, but for the time being its really fun to have such high resolution images to manipulate. HDV will remain the consumer format for a long time, it isn't perfect, but while we all wait for P2 cards and some sort of long term archival storage medium to get cheaper it works for me, and I have no problem converting footage to 24p over night with Magic Bullet.

This new Canon camera is garbage. Why the hell would anyone pay 5000 more dollars for an HDV camera. This thing is nothing more than an XL2 with HDV capabilities and it still doesn't have a ******* LCD screen. WTF!!?! Canon is fooling themselves if they think they can trick people into buying their kit for much longer.

The HVX-200 and cameras like it will be the wave of the future, but I'm guessing it won't be "here" for another 3 years. Until they figure out a way that you can archive your footage without buying 2 new hard drives for each of your short films, just so you can archive your footage, I'm not buying it. I think the FX1 will last me until then.
Posted: Mon, 19th Sep 2005, 8:49am

Post 27 of 32

Joshua Davies

Force: 25400 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 3029

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

FXhome Team Member

Like you say, I can see some reasons for HDV being popular in the consumer market over the next couple of years.

What seems odd here is they are using a low quality codec/tape in a camera costing nearly $10,000! At that kinda price you're not worried about buying cheap HDs to backup on to or even double layered DVDs - you want quality. P2 has the quality and reliability and is cheaper, although it won't hit the home consumer level for a while.

Still, I think any consumer who is really serious about film will want to consider the $4000-5000 P2 camera when it comes out at the end of the year - for the price NOTHING will get close.
Posted: Mon, 19th Sep 2005, 8:50am

Post 28 of 32

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

As for HDV, I think it's a decent format, seeing as how its 6 times higher res than DV for the price of DV (in sonys case). Jvc's pro stuff isn't bad at all. the low end stuff is shit. I totally dig my vx2100 and it'll last me until the hvx200 and its components get cheap, or someone makes something better than it.

Last edited Mon, 19th Sep 2005, 9:11am; edited 2 times in total.

Posted: Mon, 19th Sep 2005, 8:59am

Post 29 of 32

cantaclaro

Force: 2036 | Joined: 24th Oct 2001 | Posts: 875

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

It doesn't have an LCD it has a flip top viewfinder, which is retarded.



HDV is 6.75 times the resolution of DV not 3.

1920x1080=2073600 pixels

720x480=345600 pixels (640x480=307200 pixels)(.9 pixel aspect ratio for NTSC)

If you are planning to buy the Canon for $10000 over the HVX200 for $5000 you are an idiot. Nuff said.
Posted: Sat, 1st Oct 2005, 11:42pm

Post 30 of 32

wdy

Force: 1700 | Joined: 30th Dec 2002 | Posts: 1258

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User MacOS User

Gold Member

"The XL H1 and 20X lens will be avaialble in November for under $9000" - Press Launch

By my understanding Sony has a new HD camera coming out around the same time as well.. but haven't found to much info on it.. besides its the Sony HVR-Z1.
Posted: Sat, 1st Oct 2005, 11:50pm

Post 31 of 32

er-no

Force: 9531 | Joined: 24th Sep 2002 | Posts: 3964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

The Z1 would be the camera I want most. Fantastic design and features.

I'll dread to touch the XL H1, and I think Canon might regret keeping to the XL1's design - especially with the lack of a HDi/LCD screen. Hard and fast shooting, especially for the kind of uses the HD equilivant cameras get used for, the DOP/Focus Puller/Camera op would love to have a screen as well as the viewfinder.
Posted: Sat, 1st Oct 2005, 11:54pm

Post 32 of 32

wdy

Force: 1700 | Joined: 30th Dec 2002 | Posts: 1258

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User MacOS User

Gold Member

Er-no you have any links to the sony?