Videomaker – Learn video production and editing, camera reviews › Forums › Cameras and Camcorders › Professional Camcorders › Considering the Canon XF200/205
April 20, 2014 at 7:53 PM #75976
Any reaction to the new Canon XF200/205? I have a Canon XHA1s and want to move to away from tapes. I am considering the XF200 and would appreciate input.
I shoot weddings, commercials, dance recitals and anything else I get a chance to do.
April 22, 2014 at 5:50 PM #210267brunerwwMember
Hi Bob – A 1080p camera in this price class might not be the best choice right now. If you're going to spend that kind of money, you should probably consider future-proofing your investment with a 4K camera such as the $4300 Sony FDR-AX1.
Your clients may not be ready for it now, but when they are, you'll be ready. In the meantime, you'll be able to deliver ultra sharp 1080p and re-crop your frames to optimize composition.
Here's what this camera can do (please watch at your monitor's highest resolution):
Hope this is helpful!
April 23, 2014 at 8:17 AM #210274
I have considered getting a 4K camera but I don't think for what I'm doing it would be worth the investment. (The camera, the media, and the new computer)
I looked at the footage you suggested from the Sony and it looks very good. (at least what I can tell from Youtube)
I have been shooting Canon cameras, still and video, for quite a while and I am familiar with how they work.
The footage I have seen from the XF200 looks good. (You can see it here if you would like – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRk23dd4N-w&list=FL78z6qyT9CaY2MyzL0kmaLw&index=3 )
I have also considered the new Canon C 100 with auto focus. I have several Canon "L" lenses that I could use with the cinema camera.
I know 4K has a lot to offer but I don't think I am ready.
Thanks for your recommendation. I can't say I have completely decided against 4K just yet.
April 24, 2014 at 1:23 PM #210289BruceParticipant
I do live performance videos with the primary output being YouTube and Vimeo. I currently use a Canon t2i and a Canon HF-M300 for multicamera generally at 720. I am considering a Canon 70D for the autofocus. I also have thought about 4K and decided that it is overkill. I already generate about 100KB of files per project. 4K would at least double that. I have good computers but I think they would strggle doing multi channel rendering in real time.
April 28, 2014 at 11:20 AM #210311
May 3, 2014 at 3:44 PM #210358
It looks like I'm the only one that thinks the Canon XF200 is worth considering.
I know 4K is coming on strong but I don't think we will be delivering much in that format for a while. I here a lot about future proofing but I wouldn't be surprised if something replaces 4K before it becomes the standard.
For where I am today a good HD camera that is easy to use and transport will get my vote and my money.
It could be that I am completely wrong and out of touch and in a few years I will wish I had listened to the wisdom of those who tried to point me in the right direction.
I thank you all for taking the time to express your thoughts on this subject.
May 6, 2014 at 6:51 PM #210366iVideoProParticipant
May 6, 2014 at 9:09 PM #210367
The ND filter is a concern. I would like to see more footage from the camera. The footage I've seen looks great. I really like the size of the camera and the new handle. The dynamic range on the 200 is impressive. I have one ordered but I am still doing a lot of research to make sure it's what I want.
May 7, 2014 at 8:47 AM #210379JosephParticipant
I cut my teeth on television news shooting and when it comes to run and gun, nothing beats the form factor of a good old fashioned camcorder with lots of buttons and switches on the side.
That being said… I’ve moved into the digital age and do more weddings (photo and video,) short films, etc. I’ve switched over to a T3i so I could also use it for stills which it’s great for, but there was a definite drop in usability as a camcorder. It works great for traditional production work, though. But then I had the opportunity to use a 70D for a music video where we had a lot of handheld action shots and it was like coming home again. The auto focus was every bit as good or better than any camcorder I’ve used in the last 20 years. Video quality is great and an 18-135 gave me an acceptible zoom range. And it offers shallow depth of field, low light performance, bokeh, yadda yadda.
I know everyone is talking about 4k… but unless you’re running a high end, cutting edge production company – or plan to in the next year or so – I wouldn’t spend the money. As you accurately pointed out, it’s not just the camera – it’s everything else you need to manage 4k. Who has a 4k TV anyway??? Let alone broadcast content to watch even if you did.
Imho, 4k is just unnecessary at this stage in the game. It’s like still cameras chasing the megapixel rabbit down the hole. 99% of photos are never viewed at higher than about 2mp resolution anyway (a 1080 monitor.) I did the math once and sadly don’t have it off the top of my head, but the viewing angle necessary to take advantage of 4k given the limits of human visual accuity is kind of crazy. You need to practically have an Imax in your living room to see a differene in terms of resolution. So if you aren’t showing your work in a theater, 4k just isn’t needed right now.
So if you want an XF200 because it has the quality you actually need, and a form factor you’re comfortable with – then go for it. (And you’ll love being able to tranfer your video with a few clicks of the mouse. It’s WAY faster than real time.)
May 7, 2014 at 5:33 PM #210384
May 7, 2014 at 10:32 PM #210386
I have tried the external recorders and have not been impressed. I want everything on board the camera.
I would probably be more inclined to use one if most of my jobs were on a tripod staying in one place. I have to move around a good bit.
Thanks for the comment.
May 16, 2014 at 1:20 PM #210428
I had trouble getting the footage to work with my NLE. I could have been operator. I also didn't like having two things to keep up with. The camera alone is enough for me to handle. That is especially true when I'm not using a tripod.
August 20, 2014 at 2:28 PM #210956
I got the Canon XF200.
So far it is everything I expected.
The rotating grip makes holding the camera easier on my wrists. Having three rings makes adjustment much easier. Image stabilization works very well even when zoomed to the full 20x.
I am looking forward to doing a lot more tests and projects with this camera.
April 26, 2014 at 7:32 AM #210300brunerwwMember
Hi Bob – sadly, the Canon C100 with Dual Pixel Autofocus is $5500 – and it's a maximum 1080p 30fps camera.
Alternatively, you may want to consider a Panasonic GH4 with the YAGH interface (2 XLR inputs, 4 HD-SDI outputs) for $3298 – add a RedRock Micro powered LiveLens EF to MFT adapter for $598, and you'll have a camera that is compatible with your Canon lenses for less than $4000.
This camera shoots 1080p at up to 96fps – and it records to 4K internally (with easy to manage 100mbps files on relatively inexpensive SD cards) when you want to step up.
Here is what this camera can do:
Again, hope this is helpful!
May 8, 2014 at 1:35 AM #210388Johnny73Participant
Okay does'nt sound good, would you like to highlight some of the problems you have had?
Thanks for your reply
May 9, 2014 at 5:43 PM #210398EddieValiantParticipant
I'll second your comments about 4K and add that if a client asks for (and is willing to pay for) 4K, then renting a 4K camera and a capable computer would be the way to go at this point.
When Wal-mart annouces they're carrying 4K screens, then go get 4K equipment.
September 4, 2014 at 7:34 PM #211016KamilParticipant
I'm looking at the XF200 for a documentary/promotional work I have to do for a not-for-profit in some pretty remote areas. Namely, northern Pakistan and Kenya. How has the XF200 worked out for you in your run and gun type shooting style? My main concern is the lack of an ND filter external switch. Has it been an issue? Thanks!
September 28, 2015 at 7:43 PM #212861javapopParticipant
Nice to look through and see some of your decision making process Bob. We have (2) XHA1s HDV cams, currently use only for weddings and performances. I use a 6D, and now a 7D2 for all of my promo work, and also shoot all the wedding content outside the ceremony.
We (my wife and partner) tried a XA25 this past weekend via CPS loan, and my wife loved it. Much lighter than the XHA1s and amazingly zippy AF.
It’s a shame that the XHA1s models are fetching well under $1k now via eBay. The XA25, or really the XA20 would work for us; could be purchased for roughly $1500; and then we jump to $3500 for the XF200. The thing that looked the most interesting were the 3 separate rings like our XHA1s cams have, which is much better for manual shooting at performances, and that swivel handle looks great for getting different angles at weddings, particular receptions.
Again, it was great looking back over this thread.
September 8, 2014 at 11:53 AM #211030
I have not done a lot of outside work with the XF200. When you set it on auto iris with auto ND it works pretty well. If you are using manuel iris with auto ND it's ok but you will have to use a higher F-stop to get a good exposure. If you are wanting to have the iris wide open in bright sunlight I would recomend an external ND so you can get a shallow DoF.
Overall I really like the camera and I'm planning to add another when the budget will allow.
October 24, 2014 at 2:12 PM #211285unriehlParticipant
i too am considering the xf200. what is your opinion on the battery life and also approx how much storage (time wise) do you get on the cards? thanks
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.