Optura Xi --- Seen One ?
 

http://www.canondv.com/opturaxi/index.html

has anyone seen the new Optura Xi yet, I mean physicaly held one? any intial thoughts after reading specs? According to the specs it's pixel count is almost that of the GL2 and with optical stabilization, it looks like a real contender. Or am I just being fooled like the average consumer should be?

It's always hard to tell from advertising banter, but it looks like it's definitely a step up from the ZR series. The Xi is 2CCD and I believe all ZRs are just 1. The GL2, however, is three, but then again there are a lot of 1CCD cams that are comparable to 3 chippers.

All things aside, I just like how the GL2 looks!

Sorry, where's the reference that it has two CCD's? I thought I was pretty sure it's a single-chipper.

Eh, yeah, it doesn't have 2CCD's, thats for sure. I've heard of there being some prototype/experimental cameras with 2CCD's, and some with 4CCD's before, but that I know of, there are no 2CCD DV camcorders in existense today.

For the price it will be going for, i'd much rather get a Panasonic DV953...

Oops! I just misread the "2.0 megapixel CCD" part.

2CCD would be like freakin Two Color Technicolor process from the early 30's...lol...

Am I the only one uncomfortable with all these camera manufacturers squeezing as many pixels as possible onto these CCD's? 3MP on a 1/3" CCD? geez....buy a separate digital camera if you want digital stills. Last time I checked, my VX2000 had 380,000 pixels on each 1/3" CCD, and that's all it should ever have. We currently don't have some "super format" that can take advantage of all these extra pixels laying around....if my camera has 3 million pixels, I want it to record a 2048x1536 video at 24fps with 48Khz sound. If I could output at 1:1 2k film resolution with a handheld camera, would be happy.

It's unfortunate than marketing has taken over the design of camcorders. The manufacturers are squeezing more pixels onto the cameras just to inflate their numbers. To me, digital stills is a useless feature and just robs CCD area from the video recording portion of the camera, resulting in poorer low light ability and crappier video.

Yup. I agree. Personally, I'd like to see all CCD pixels go for video. For stills I prefer 400 ASA Fuji color. (stick_tongue_out.gif)

I shoot almost everything on Fuji Velvia and cross-process it in C41, then use my Minolta DiMage film scanner to get VERY nice 6megapixel scans. Sure, Digital is more convenient, but since I shoot 75% wider than 22mm, Digital isn't good for me because of the focal length conversion. Full frame sensors are still way too expensive.

I still love film for photography, I've never tried digital and I won't for awhile until I can afford a good DSLR. And I agree, I really hate that photo button on all cameras nowadays. If you want digital stills, get a digital still camera!!

The big advantage of having an SD card and "digital still photo" capability on a camcorder like this is the highly useful, oft overlooked title mix function which lets you superimpose an image from the SD card over live video as it records. Instant logo bugs, instant 16x9 letterbox matte, instant titles are a few of the variety of uses for this handy function. I'm glad it's there.

<<<-- Originally posted by Glenn Chan : It's unfortunate than marketing has taken over the design of camcorders. The manufacturers are squeezing more pixels onto the cameras just to inflate their numbers. To me, digital stills is a useless feature and just robs CCD area from the video recording portion of the camera, resulting in poorer low light ability and crappier video. -->>>
I think another reason to go for 1CCD instead of 3CCD is about the size. Currently all 1/3" 3CCD model are very large in size and may not suitable for normal users and travel use. Pansonic has some compact 3CCD but with smaller 1/6" CCD.

Recently Sony just announced a new compact DV model DCR-PC300K which have 3M pixel (2M pixel effective for video), 1/3" CCD but with RGB color filter is try to make a balance between 1CCD and 3CCD. 2M pixel for video (1600x1200) with RGB color filter may equal to 'effective pixel of 3CCD of 800x600', i.e. almost equal to pack 4 1/6" CCD together to capture the color.

The low light condition is definitely poor than real 1/3" 3CCD model but the size and weight may suit casual use and get comparable result from 3CCD model.

Of course, if there exists compact DV model with 1/3" 3CCD (most probably from Panasonic) in 1 or 2 years later, it may be a good choice for normal users as well.

Do these 2 new Opturas have OIS or DIS? I haven't had time to go through all the specs. Thanks.

Okay, I found out that the Japanese version of the Canon Optura 300 has OIS.

Optura Xi is definitely OIS, but contrary to what Frank reports, I'm fairly certain the Optura 300 is DIS (in the U.S. anyway). Hope this helps,